From an early age, children are taught to respect authority. As children mature, the need to obey commands from authority figures increases. Over time, adults learn that society rewards those who follow rules and punishes those who do not. But what happens when obedience loses its moral center and crosses over into something cruel and harmful? This ethical dilemma was captured in a simple experiment carried out at Yale University nearly a half century ago.
The Idea Behind the Milgram Experiment
During the early 1960s, a Yale University psychologist named Stanley Milgram wondered at what point obedience became a vice instead of a virtue. He designed an experiment to explore the destructive influence of authority on obedience.
His experiment was a model of simplicity. An 'experimenter' (E) would issue commands to a 'teacher' (T), who then would instruct a learner [or 'victim' (V)] to perform memory tasks. Milgram advertised for adults to take part in a “scientific study of memory and learning.” Candidates were offered $4.00 an hour (plus $0.50 in carfare allowance) for one hour of experimental time.
There was only one problem — the experiment was a hoax.
The Experimental Conditions
The 'experimenter' was a biology teacher in a gray laboratory coat. A 'teacher' was paired up with a 'victim' and told to draw slips of paper that would assign a role to play. In reality, both slips of paper said 'teacher.' The 'victim' was a paid actor.
The 'teacher' and 'victim' then went into separate rooms. The 'teacher' sat behind an instrument panel. The 'victim' was strapped to a chair with an electrode attached to one wrist.
The 'experimenter' told the 'teacher' that the assignment was to teach word pairs to the 'victim.' Once a word was read, four possible answers were given. If the 'victim' chose the correct answer, the next word was read. If a wrong answer was given, the 'teacher' had to administer an electric shock. The electric shock would increase by stages to a maximum of 450 volts.
According to Milgram (1974), the instrument panel was clearly marked with dials that said “Slight Shock, Moderate Shock, Strong Shock, Very Strong Shock, Intense Shock, Extreme Intensity Shock, and Danger: Severe Shock.” The 'teacher' was given a test shock of 45 volts to show that the generator was real and to demonstrate what the 'victim' would be feeling.
In fact, the 'victim' never received any shocks at all.
How Much Pain Would a 'Teacher' Administer?
As the experiment progressed, the 'victim' deliberately answered incorrectly, which obliged the 'teacher' to administer electric shocks. At 75 volts, the 'victim' began to groan. When the voltage reached 120 volts, the 'victim' complained of discomfort. At 150 volts, the 'victim' demanded that the experiment end. At successively higher voltages, the screams became shrieks of terror until the 'victim' fell silent after 285 volts.
The experiment questioned how far a 'teacher' would go in administering pain to another human being under orders from an 'experimenter.' As Milgram observed (1981), at what point would morality defy authority?
If a 'teacher' began to show discomfort or hesitation, the 'experimenter' pressured the 'teacher' to continue. According to Milgram (1963), the pressure was applied in four steps until the 'teacher' continued:
- “Please continue.
- The experiment requires that you continue.
- It is absolutely essential that you continue.
- You have no other choice, you must go on.”
Milgram (1963) expected most 'teachers' to stop at the first perception of human suffering. To his surprise, 65% of 'teachers' applied the maximum amount of voltage at the direction of the authority figure, while only 35% discontinued the experiment at some point.
Implications of Authority on Obedience
More than a decade after the results were published, Milgram reflected on the meaning of his experiment in a 1974 essay. He noted that the “ordinary person who shocked the victim did so out of a sense of obligation” and not from aggression. Even though many 'teachers' protested, they obeyed anyway because they “could not bring themselves to make an open break with authority.” Milgram noted the essential ethical dilemma in his experiment — the 'teachers' felt responsible to the authority figure, but not accountable for their actions.
The Milgram Experiment began in 1961, shortly after former Nazi Adolf Eichmann went on trial for crimes against humanity. What was Eichmann's defense for his role in the Holocaust? Like the 'teachers,' Eichmann claimed that he was merely following orders.
The Problem of Evil
In a perfect world, human beings act according to an individual code of ethics. In a world where authority holds greater weight than morality, however, human beings tend to avoid responsibility for evil actions. After all, there is always someone else to blame. This is the essential problem of evil.
Ethics is easier to express in theory than to carry out in practice. The willingness to do the right thing is weakened when responsibility for evil behavior disappears. If nothing else, the Milgram Experiment demonstrated the dangers of blind obedience to authority.
References
Milgram, S. 1963. Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 67(4):371–378.
-------. 1974. The perils of obedience. Harper’s Magazine. New York: Harper & Row.
-------. 1981. This week's citation classic. Current Contents. CC/9(March 2):114.
 |
 |
