On April 11, 1961, the famous "Eichmann trial" began — one of the first court cases to be widely broadcast on international television. Adolf Eichmann was accused of being a key figure in the extermination of millions of Jews during World War II. During the trial, he portrayed himself as a mere bureaucrat following orders, a cog in the machine, not someone who made decisions. The trial had an enormous global impact and sparked much reflection, including from philosopher Hannah Arendt, who in 1963 published Eichmann in Jerusalem, where she introduced the famous phrase "the banality of evil."
Stanley Milgram research
Just three months after the trial began, American psychologist Stanley Milgram — the son of European Jewish parents — launched what would become the most famous experiment on obedience, inspired by the question: “Were Eichmann and his accomplices simply obedient individuals following orders?”
Milgram recruited participants by telling them they would be part of a study on memory, assigning them randomly to the role of either “teacher” or “learner.” In reality, the subject was always given the role of teacher, while the learner was an actor and in on the experiment’s true purpose.
In the experiment, the learner was strapped to electrodes in one room, while the teacher sat in another room in front of an electric shock generator with switches increasing in voltage. The learner’s task was to memorize word pairs and the teacher’s job was to test them. For every wrong answer, the teacher was instructed to administer an increasingly strong electric shock, from 15 up to 450 volts. No actual shocks were given, but the actor pretended to be in increasing pain — groaning, screaming, and eventually falling silent, simulating unconsciousness. If the teacher hesitated, the experimenter (wearing a white lab coat) would prod them with phrases like, “The experiment requires that you continue” or “It is essential that you continue.”
About 65% of participants continued all the way to the maximum 450 volts, often showing signs of distress and inner conflict. None stopped before reaching 300 volts.
The experiment was highly controversial, especially from an ethical standpoint. Today, such a study would almost certainly not be approved by any ethics committee, but even at the time, it faced criticism for the stress it caused participants. Milgram concluded that his experiment demonstrated how ordinary people are willing to perform morally questionable actions when under the pressure of a perceived legitimate authority — raising crucial ethical and psychological questions about personal responsibility and obedience.
Although some critics later questioned the study’s methodology and conclusions, many subsequent experiments supported Milgram’s findings. Still, it is difficult to claim that his procedure fully captured the complex psychological and historical mechanisms that led to the Holocaust.
An authoritative but open-minded teacher can support a student’s development, yet research shows that even a friendly figure — if perceived as authoritative — can elicit compliance in children. It is therefore essential to encourage students to ask questions, express disagreement respectfully, and recognize when an instruction is unjust. Paradoxically, educating children to practice “conscious disobedience” can be a powerful way to teach ethical responsibility. It helps them learn that they don’t have to follow the group or obey authority when confronted with bullying or injustice. Children can be encouraged to ask themselves: “Why did I make this choice? Do I think it’s right? Would I have done the same if no one had told me to?”
Despite awareness, it is not easy — especially for a child — to speak out against authority or a group (after all, even Milgram’s adult participants struggled!). That’s why it’s crucial to foster an environment where disagreement is accepted, where the community is supportive, and where no child feels alone in speaking up.
 |
| Adolf Eichmann, convicted of crimes against humanity, Jewish people and war crimes |
Just three months after the trial began, American psychologist Stanley Milgram — the son of European Jewish parents — launched what would become the most famous experiment on obedience, inspired by the question: “Were Eichmann and his accomplices simply obedient individuals following orders?”
Milgram recruited participants by telling them they would be part of a study on memory, assigning them randomly to the role of either “teacher” or “learner.” In reality, the subject was always given the role of teacher, while the learner was an actor and in on the experiment’s true purpose.
In the experiment, the learner was strapped to electrodes in one room, while the teacher sat in another room in front of an electric shock generator with switches increasing in voltage. The learner’s task was to memorize word pairs and the teacher’s job was to test them. For every wrong answer, the teacher was instructed to administer an increasingly strong electric shock, from 15 up to 450 volts. No actual shocks were given, but the actor pretended to be in increasing pain — groaning, screaming, and eventually falling silent, simulating unconsciousness. If the teacher hesitated, the experimenter (wearing a white lab coat) would prod them with phrases like, “The experiment requires that you continue” or “It is essential that you continue.”
About 65% of participants continued all the way to the maximum 450 volts, often showing signs of distress and inner conflict. None stopped before reaching 300 volts.
The experiment was highly controversial, especially from an ethical standpoint. Today, such a study would almost certainly not be approved by any ethics committee, but even at the time, it faced criticism for the stress it caused participants. Milgram concluded that his experiment demonstrated how ordinary people are willing to perform morally questionable actions when under the pressure of a perceived legitimate authority — raising crucial ethical and psychological questions about personal responsibility and obedience.
Although some critics later questioned the study’s methodology and conclusions, many subsequent experiments supported Milgram’s findings. Still, it is difficult to claim that his procedure fully captured the complex psychological and historical mechanisms that led to the Holocaust.
 |
| Stanley Milgram |
Education
Milgram’s results suggest that the more hierarchical a context is, the more likely individuals are to follow orders from authority. One possible countermeasure is to question the legitimacy of the authority to which one is submitting. However, in some contexts, hierarchy is unavoidable — for example, in schools, where students are guided by teachers. In such cases, obedience can be a positive force but may also inhibit critical thinking, creativity, and the expression of doubt.An authoritative but open-minded teacher can support a student’s development, yet research shows that even a friendly figure — if perceived as authoritative — can elicit compliance in children. It is therefore essential to encourage students to ask questions, express disagreement respectfully, and recognize when an instruction is unjust. Paradoxically, educating children to practice “conscious disobedience” can be a powerful way to teach ethical responsibility. It helps them learn that they don’t have to follow the group or obey authority when confronted with bullying or injustice. Children can be encouraged to ask themselves: “Why did I make this choice? Do I think it’s right? Would I have done the same if no one had told me to?”
Despite awareness, it is not easy — especially for a child — to speak out against authority or a group (after all, even Milgram’s adult participants struggled!). That’s why it’s crucial to foster an environment where disagreement is accepted, where the community is supportive, and where no child feels alone in speaking up.
Comments
Post a Comment