Problem: Discuss Stanley Milgram's classic "The Perils of Obedience," Diana Baumrind's sharp criticism, and Milgram's reaction to it. As a class, try to come to a conclusion about answers to these questions:
1. Are Milgram and Baumrind authoritative sources for a discussion about psychological testing and human propensities to violence? How do you know?
2. How do Milgram's findings corroborate Hannah Arendt's thesis about the "banality of evil"? What does that phrase mean? Who is Eichmann? Need Assignment Help?
3. What does Milgram identify as the "essence of obedience"? Do you agree with his conclusion that "fragmentation of the total human act" means that "no one is confronted with the consequences of his decision to carry out the evil act"? Explain his conclusion, and your position.
4. Do you believe that this experiment teaches us anything new about human nature?
5. Do you agree with Baumrind that the subjects were "entrapped" into committing unworthy acts?
6. Why does Baumrind assert that the Milgram experiment was potentially harmful? What are her other criticisms about the experiment?
7. Considering the arguments presented in these 3 articles, provide a rough outline of the "pros" and "cons" of Milgram's position. Does his "reply to Baumrind" adequately refute the criticism of Baumrind and others? Why or why not?
8. Were you surprised by the results of Milgram's experiment? Milgram first published his findings more than 40 years ago, in 1963. If the experiment were repeated today, do you think the results would be different? Why or why not?