Why the belief in "authority" is so dangerous.

[NoStateofMind]

Throughout history man has constantly allowed or developed a hierarchy to "maintain" society. Either by someone claiming to be god, a son of god, a king, a pope or as we have it now a "president". These ruling classes always had the will of the people to obey their commands. Because of this belief in "authority" horrible atrocities have transpired on this planet over and over again. Hitler, Stalin or Mao could not have committed all of their heinous acts without the compliance of "law abiding" people. Those people wouldn't want, of their own conscience, to harm others but a strange thing happens when a perceived "authority" enters the equation. When an "authority figure" gives a command to someone else, the otherwise good person disconnects themselves from the responsibility of the harmful edict. Imagining that the responsibility lies with the one giving the commands and not themselves. They may even express discomfort in "following orders", protest that its "not right" but the majority of people, a staggering and quite frightening 2/3's of "law abiding citizens", continue their torture or murder at the behest of the "authority figure".

This is not some made up theory that I have conjured up. In fact it was a social experiment by Stanley Milgram, otherwise known as The Milgram Experiment. That experiment was in 1961 and later tested again in 2009 (links below). He proved that most people are willing to do what they are told rather than to do what is right even when the damage they inflicted may have caused unconsciousness or death. This is two thirds of people. Two out of three people you know, would cause you harm and even death if "authority" commanded it.

It is quite disturbing to see how many would disregard their moral principles simply because someone told them to. It is my hope that the "law abiding" populace checks with their own virtues before deferring blame to the "authority figure" giving orders. Please take some time to review the video's and links below.


Video: The original Milgram Experiment. 44min


Video: Milgram Experiment BBC TV. 15min

I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces. - Étienne de La Boétie

 

[Guurn]

Actually when participants in the studies were ordered to do things they resisted 100% of the time. The results and conclusions of the experiment have been revisited and now it seems that it proves that people will follow as long as they think it is for the greater good or to help science, not authority.

In an essay published in the open-access journal PLoS Biology, they argue that people will indeed comply with the questionable demands of authority figures—but only if they strongly identify with that person, and buy into the rightness of those beliefs.

As summary can be found here.

NPR had an interview with a Psychologist that reviewed the experiment in total. It was really a test of what commands were most likely to persuade the participant to follow. It started with gentle persuasion and advanced to commands. It started with "please continue" and advanced to "you have no choice, continue". The authoritative you have no choice was resisted 100%. There were hundreds of different commands given in the tests and dozens of different testing scenarios. Everything from having the shocker in a different room and not being able to see (only hear) the person being shocked to having them in the same room holding the persons hand on the electrodes. The 65% figure is the highest result and was when the person was in a different room and not able to see the person being shocked.

 

[Matt1970]

The problem is we keep granting more and more power to those we think have our best interests at heart. Has that ever really worked out for the best?

 

[Attic]

Actually when participants in the studies were ordered to do things they resisted 100% of the time. The results and conclusions of the experiment have been revisited and now it seems that it proves that people will follow as long as they think it is for the greater good or to help science, not authority.

As summary can be found here.

NPR had an interview with a Psychologist that reviewed the experiment in total. It was really a test of what commands were most likely to persuade the participant to follow. It started with gentle persuasion and advanced to commands. It started with "please continue" and advanced to "you have no choice, continue". The authoritative you have no choice was resisted 100%. There were hundreds of different commands given in the tests and dozens of different testing scenarios. Everything from having the shocker in a different room and not being able to see (only hear) the person being shocked to having them in the same room holding the persons hand on the electrodes. The 65% figure is the highest result and was when the person was in a different room and not able to see the person being shocked.

This argument is chasing it's tail by redefining authority in more pleasant terms. Deception from authority is rampant, so it seems clear it is capable of redefining itself to achieve it's goals, particularly if it needs to do so to get folks to abandon morals.

Iraq?, WMD? You think we go in there if we say we need MOAR stuff, instead of we do this in the name of Democracy (for the greater good) behind sounds of cheering?

 

[mistercrabby]

Oh, boy, here we go again...

More anti-democratic, anti-American, "Sovereign Citizen" falderal...
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35414961&postcount=251

NSOP sounds vapidly harmless, if not a tad repetitive, but what lurks behind is a dangerous mentality, which if these other examples are an indication, leads to violence and terror.

'Sovereign citizens': Is Jared Loughner a sign of revived extremist threat?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0...d-Loughner-a-sign-of-revived-extremist-threat
Since 2010 began, 'sovereign citizens' have shot police officers, flown a plane into an IRS building, and stolen a strip mall. Jared Loughner, the alleged Tuscon shooter, may be an adherent.

Joe Stack, who piloted a Piper Dakota airplane into an Austin, Texas, IRS building in February 2010, was a sovereign citizen who left a convoluted manifesto.
The Guardians of the Free Republic, a sovereign-citizen group that has tried to set up an alternative US government, last year sent subtly threatening letters to all 50 US governors.
Scott Roeder, convicted of fatally shooting late-term abortion doctor George Tiller at a Sunday church service in Wichita, Kan., in May 2009, has links to the sovereign-citizen movement.

See what I mean? Pretty scary.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Actually when participants in the studies were ordered to do things they resisted 100% of the time. The results and conclusions of the experiment have been revisited and now it seems that it proves that people will follow as long as they think it is for the greater good or to help science, not authority.

As summary can be found here.

NPR had an interview with a Psychologist that reviewed the experiment in total. It was really a test of what commands were most likely to persuade the participant to follow. It started with gentle persuasion and advanced to commands. It started with "please continue" and advanced to "you have no choice, continue". The authoritative you have no choice was resisted 100%. There were hundreds of different commands given in the tests and dozens of different testing scenarios. Everything from having the shocker in a different room and not being able to see (only hear) the person being shocked to having them in the same room holding the persons hand on the electrodes. The 65% figure is the highest result and was when the person was in a different room and not able to see the person being shocked.

As another post states changing the name doesn't change the effect. "Authority" often uses the excuse of "greater good" to obtain whatever malicious objective they desire.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Oh, boy, here we go again...

More anti-democratic, anti-American, "Sovereign Citizen" falderal...
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35414961&postcount=251

NSOP sounds vapidly harmless, if not a tad repetitive, but what lurks behind is a dangerous mentality, which if these other examples are an indication, leads to violence and terror.

'Sovereign citizens': Is Jared Loughner a sign of revived extremist threat?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0...d-Loughner-a-sign-of-revived-extremist-threat
Since 2010 began, 'sovereign citizens' have shot police officers, flown a plane into an IRS building, and stolen a strip mall. Jared Loughner, the alleged Tuscon shooter, may be an adherent.

Joe Stack, who piloted a Piper Dakota airplane into an Austin, Texas, IRS building in February 2010, was a sovereign citizen who left a convoluted manifesto.
The Guardians of the Free Republic, a sovereign-citizen group that has tried to set up an alternative US government, last year sent subtly threatening letters to all 50 US governors.
Scott Roeder, convicted of fatally shooting late-term abortion doctor George Tiller at a Sunday church service in Wichita, Kan., in May 2009, has links to the sovereign-citizen movement.

See what I mean? Pretty scary.

Can you refute the study?

 

[mistercrabby]

Plenty of real life, flesh and blood examples, don't need to fool with "lab experiments".

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...i-government-sovereign-citizens-movement?lite
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremist groups, says that the movement has grown since the late 2000s but says it can’t know how many believers there are, in part because the movement has no central leadership.
“Sovereign citizens” trace alternate versions of American history, the center says.
Some believe that the American government secretly replaced the system designed by the founding fathers with a version of maritime law and enslaved citizens, and that judges around the country are in on the secret.
Some also believe that the government, at the birth of each child in the United States, sets up a corporate shell account and assigns the rights of the child to the account-holders, the center says.
By filing frivolous lawsuits, “sovereign citizens” adherents believe they can free themselves from the corporate masters and access the money in their shell accounts, the center says.

 

[Jaskalas]

Two out of three people you know, would cause you harm and even death if "authority" commanded it.

In evolutionary terms, we are not far removed from the days of Kings.

Perhaps in time we can more greatly affirm the casting off of those shackles, even into the deepest reassesses of our minds. Until then however, will we have to combat the instinct bred into us by thousands of years.

It is good to understand human weaknesses. If bowing to authority is one of them, then our recognition of it will assist us in combating it. In training ourselves to overcome it.

 

[Jaskalas]

I'll give you two modern examples.

1: The Patriot Act.
2: The Iraq War.

Things that should never have happened. We followed authority against human rights, against our own blood and coin.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

How do you people live with yourselves? All of you bow to authority every day of your lives living anywhere other than your own private island.

 

[Jhhnn]

The real issue is deriving authority from the consent of the governed, and in using that authority to promote social cohesion & an appreciation of shared values.

That's why democratic republics were invented, and why we have elections. That's also why we must necessarily limit the power of other authoritarian organizations, particularly religion & business. Their authority does not originate from democratic underpinnings at all.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Plenty of real life, flesh and blood examples, don't need to fool with "lab experiments".

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...i-government-sovereign-citizens-movement?lite
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremist groups, says that the movement has grown since the late 2000s but says it can’t know how many believers there are, in part because the movement has no central leadership.
“Sovereign citizens” trace alternate versions of American history, the center says.
Some believe that the American government secretly replaced the system designed by the founding fathers with a version of maritime law and enslaved citizens, and that judges around the country are in on the secret.
Some also believe that the government, at the birth of each child in the United States, sets up a corporate shell account and assigns the rights of the child to the account-holders, the center says.
By filing frivolous lawsuits, “sovereign citizens” adherents believe they can free themselves from the corporate masters and access the money in their shell accounts, the center says.

^^apart of the two thirds.

 

[NoStateofMind]

In evolutionary terms, we are not far removed from the days of Kings.

Perhaps in time we can more greatly affirm the casting off of those shackles, even into the deepest reassesses of our minds. Until then however, will we have to combat the instinct bred into us by thousands of years.

It is good to understand human weaknesses. If bowing to authority is one of them, then our recognition of it will assist us in combating it. In training ourselves to overcome it.

Exactly! Recognize the problem so it can be dealt with. :thumbsup:

 

[DucatiMonster696]

I'll give you two modern examples.

1: The Patriot Act.
2: The Iraq War.

Things that should never have happened. We followed authority against human rights, against our own blood and coin.

Two more were "authority"/""authorities" ran a muck because they were doing these things for our "own good".

3l: NSA Scandal
4.) Fast and Furious

 

[NoStateofMind]

How do you people live with yourselves? All of you bow to authority every day of your lives living anywhere other than your own private island.

Openly defying your master is a very hazardous thing. It is one thing to be free in mind but also smart to realize that if a belief held by you is contrary to popular opinion (in this case two thirds) then you risk persecution like that of the days when copernicus made the blasphemous claim that the earth revolved around the sun. Free the minds of the people first and freedom will reign in time.

 

[Jhhnn]

Two more were "authority"/""authorities" ran a muck because they were doing these things for our "own good".

3l: NSA Scandal
4.) Fast and Furious

Oh, please. While this business with the NSA may prove to be as you say, fast & furious was no such thing.

Well, unless you'd care to explain how the Arizona US Attorney refusing to exercise his authority was an abuse of it... The BATF brought him tons of evidence that he refused to act upon until a border agent was killed.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Openly defying your master is a very hazardous thing. It is one thing to be free in mind but also smart to realize that if a belief held by you is contrary to popular opinion (in this case two thirds) then you risk persecution like that of the days when copernicus made the blasphemous claim that the earth revolved around the sun. Free the minds of the people first and freedom will reign in time.

Good luck with your fairy tale utopia that will never come to be in your lifetime.

 

[NoStateofMind]

The real issue is deriving authority from the consent of the governed, and in using that authority to promote social cohesion & an appreciation of shared values.

That's why democratic republics were invented, and why we have elections. That's also why we must necessarily limit the power of other authoritarian organizations, particularly religion & business. Their authority does not originate from democratic underpinnings at all.

Name one "government" that didn't subdue its people. China is a republic and we know how well that's working out for those who intend to be free. The fact is it doesn't matter which type of "government" is instituted we always end up enslaved due to the belief that a select few have the "right" to rule. Doesn't matter whether it be socialist, democratic, republic, communist or a combination of all, the very fact there is a ruling class means that good people will be "law abiding" and cause harm to others and attribute their actions to the state. Disassociating themselves from responsibility and morality. That's why the belief in "authority" is so dangerous.

 

[OCGuy]

OP when does school start back up?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Good luck with your fairy tale utopia that will never come to be in your lifetime.

Is it a fairy tale for you to treat others as free human beings? That's whats being advocated here. But again, a soldier such as yourself was not bred to think you were bred to follow orders.

 

[NoStateofMind]

OP when does school start back up?

What does that have to do with the topic?

 

[justoh]

We can't have anarchy. That's just crazy talk.

 

[NoStateofMind]

We can't have anarchy. That's just crazy talk.

Why not?

 

[justoh]

Why not?

Just cos.