Similarities and differences between Milgram’s and Adorno et al Approach Exploring Why People might do Harms to Others
Introduction
Milgram
was a social psychologist and conducted many experiments concerning the
phenomenon ‘’why people might do evil to others. Banyard, (2012) cited in Brace,
and Byford (pp, 55-97) His experiment emerged a moral dilemma between what
people are doing and what they should do concerning the right and wrong
perspective. Milgram research on why people might harm others
became a reflection or mirror for other people, and they can evaluate their actual image unlike to the expected one (Byford, 2017). Similarly, Adorno was a social psychologist and had considerable contribution in investigating why people might harm others. Both social psychologists have played a significant role in social psychology and possess some similarities and differences in their approach (Canetti et al., 2017). The differences and similarities in their approach concerning the aspect ‘’why people might harm others’’ have been elaborated below.
became a reflection or mirror for other people, and they can evaluate their actual image unlike to the expected one (Byford, 2017). Similarly, Adorno was a social psychologist and had considerable contribution in investigating why people might harm others. Both social psychologists have played a significant role in social psychology and possess some similarities and differences in their approach (Canetti et al., 2017). The differences and similarities in their approach concerning the aspect ‘’why people might harm others’’ have been elaborated below.
Main body
Similarities. The Milgram and Adorno have following similarities in their work
concerning the ‘’why people might harm others’’.
·
The
primary similarity between Adorno and Milgram was that their inspiration for
working on why people might harm to other was inspired by a big moral question
after the second world war, how the terror of the world ward happened and how
it can be prevented in the future (Chien, 2016). The people were
psychologically and emotionally disturb and both aimed at protecting the
victims from overcoming from a traumatic phase. After the Second world war,
they focused on exploring the answer ‘’why people might harm others’’. What is
the purpose behind their evil?
·
The
Milgram started conducting experiments on human why and how people keep
engaging in harming others. He conducted numerous experiments to explore the
phenomena. Similarly, Adorno et al. conducted qualitative studies to develop an
F scale which measure the Fascist personalities (Cichocka, Dhont, &
Makwana, 2017). Both were engaged in
exploring the human psychology of why people might harm others.
·
Milgram
and Adorno focused on the aspects of authorities and obedient personalities.
Milgram work on obedience to authority was unique and got considerable
attention of the peoples. Milgram experimented with the number of people to see
the effects of authority on obedience. The experiment was comprised of teacher
and learner (Haslam, & Reicher, 2012). The teacher was using electric shock
as a punishment for a memory based task. The results of his experiment
concluded that the people were giving lethal shocks to other participants just
because they were asked by the authoritative figure. They were following the
instructions with obedience. The experiment also concluded different aspect
that, motivates or driven the people to obey authority. Adorno proposed that
authoritative personalities are more obedient to authoritative figures (Haslam,
Loughnan, & Perry, 2014). Adorno developed F scale for measuring the
fascist personalities among individuals. Furthermore, Milgram proposed the
particular situation factors that lead to obedience among authorities
personalities.
·
Adorno
et al. recommended that authoritative people show more obedience as they feel
authoritative figure more legitimate. Milgram followed up that recommendation
and carried out a study comprised of 200 deviant and obedient participants, the
MMPI and California F scale was used to investigate the results. The output
data of the investigating suggested that the authoritative personalities were
more obedient as compared to submissive (Dhont, Van Hiel, Pattyn, Onraet, &
Severens, 2011).
Differences. The Milgram and Adorno social experiment and contributions have
some differences that are imperative to brog into the notice.
·
According
to Adorno the personality of the individual primarily depends upon the
parenting and early childhood experiences (Haslam, & Reicher, 2012). If the
parents raise their child in authorities and submissive way, the children
develop more obedient characteristic. He also explained that the childhood
bitter and positive experiences also affect the obedience level and
personalities of the children. In contrast, according to Adorno people have
natural tendencies and situational factors to mistreat the weak (Verhulst,
Eaves, & Hatemi, 2012). People obey authoritative figures when they find
themselves helpless. In some other situation personal interest, also an
important factor that driven people to obey others (The Open University, 2014).
The weak personality and lack of resources play a significant role in
performing the obedient role among participants.
·
Milgram
stated that less educated people found to be more obedient than educated
people. The well-educated people developed high self-esteem and insight for
their personal growth and potentials. They believed in their capabilities
rather than obeying others. Therefore they least obey authoritative figures.
The educated people develop a sense all humans are equal; they grow reluctant
behaviour to harm others (Haslam, & Reicher, 2012). The literature also
supported the findings of the Milgram study and recommended that educated
people are least obedient as compared to well-educated people whereas Adorno
considered the educated least significant for obedience.
· The Milgram experiments have been criticised by the psychologist
and researchers on a high scale as it was considered the more cruel way to deal
with humans. The Milgram experiment for electric shock for the wrong answer in
a memory task was considered to be unethical. Furthermore, the ethics of the
research highlight the significance of the informed consent and withdrawal of
the participants from the study if they get any physical, emotional and
psychological harm . in Milgram experiment the participants were shouting to
withdrawal from the study after getting shocked, but they were not released. In
contrast, the Adorno scale development and experiment were not free of physical
harm to the participants (Haslam, & Reicher, 2012).
Conclusion
The purpose of the assignment was to explore the reasons ‘’why
people might harm others’’. The simplest answer for this question lies in the
Milgram experiment that for his interest to concluded scientific finding he has
harmed his participant in the experiment. The contribution of Milgram and
Adorno in exploring the fact ‘’why people harm to other’s is substantial in
Social psychology. The similarities and differences between both approaches
were interesting and provided significant data to spread awareness regarding
human psychology. The role of authoritative personalities in obedience was
found to help make management plan and intervention to control the injustice
against weak people or victim. Such an approach in the current times would help
in maintaining the fabric of society if used wisely.