Milgram’s obedience theory locates harsh action in situational authority pressure, not internal hatred.
Evidence
Milgram’s analysis was especially well received by his fellow experimental social psychologists because—like the historically dominant approach in so cial psychology (Blass, 1984)—it is situational in its orientation. Milgram’s approach is situational in the sense that the external pressures of the moment exerted by an authority—rather than internal instigators of action such as hostility or hatred—are seen as the main determinants of the subject’s harsh actions. Further, when the subject relinquishes responsibility to the author ity, his or her own actions are no longer under the usual moral constraints, according to Milgram (1967, 1974). — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 602
Categorization
- DEFINE: Defines ‘situational orientation’ as authority-pressure-over-internal-instigator — the load-bearing distinction of Milgram’s account.
- recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
- XREF: connects to: Ordinary people administering shocks showed extreme, characteristic distress — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 593; Focusing on obeying subordinates ignores genocidal initiators and degrees of evil — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 2007; Eichmann’s mass-murder participation was careerist, not hate-driven. (+7 more)
Broader Connections
- Duty-driven obedience, not personality, predicts cruelty under authority
#corroborates(0.95) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 434 - Milgram’s obedience studies show situations can override personal character.
#corroborates(0.95) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 111 - Ordinary people become destructive agents through duty, not hostility
#corroborates(0.95) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 606 - Situational deference to authority, not coercion, drives obedience to mass-murder regimes
#expands(0.85) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 46 - Unchecked power over others, not participant nature, drives cruelty
#corroborates(0.85) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 475 - Milgram’s situational account of construing oneself into obedience remains insightful despite pseudobiological framing.
#qualifies(0.80) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3938 - Both sovereign and disciplinary power pursue the exploitation of others through obedience
#expands(0.75)