Obedience to Authority Essay Example

Obedience to Authority Essay Example Obedience to Authority Essay Obedience to Authority Essay Obedience is a virtue, disobedience is a vice (Fromm 267). In Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem, the author Erich Fromm implies that to be a human an individual must be free to obey and disobey (272). Being obedient requires the removal of freedom, which comes from expressing your thoughts, feelings and emotions, without any boundaries or pressures from other individuals. An obedient individual is submissive towards anothers will and does not have very much freedom. Obedience occurs and can be analyzed when there is a setting of power and expectations to follow authority and a shift in viewpoint. The Stanford Prison Experiment can be interpreted in terms of Milgrams findings on submission to authority. In The Perils of Obedience, Stanley Milgram conducts an experiment where individuals are forced to violate their conscience and to either obey or disobey the dissolute demands of an authority. The experiment tests the extent to which individuals will obey immoral commands when they are ordered to inflict pain on to learners. The teacher is a genuinely naà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ve subject who has come to the laboratory for the experiment. The learner, or victim, is actually an actor who receives no shock at all (Milgram 223). The experimenter orders the teacher to ask word pairs to the learner; for every word pair wrong, the learner gets shocked with increasing intensity. The individuals administering the shocks would do what was expected of them, [obeying] the orders of the experimenter to the end, punishing victim until they reached the most potent shock available on the generator. After 450 volts were administered three times, the experimenter called a halt to the session (224). The teachers did what they were told to do, even when the learners produced loud cries and screams; they simply obeyed the rules and performed their assigned tasks because it was expected of them. Milgram learned that, the experimenters physical presence has a marked impact on his authority (232). If the experimenter was present in the laboratory rather than on the phone, the teachers would refuse to do their assigned task less than if the experimenter were on the phone giving orders. In The Stanford Prison Experiment, Philip K. Zimbardo conducts an experiment where a group of males are selected to be prison guards or prisoners in a mock prison. The setting of the experiment was designed, as if it was a real prison. The prison guards were allowed to keep order in the prison by any means necessary; they obeyed the rules and performed their jobs as expected of them. They made the prisoners feel powerless, arbitrarily controlled, dependent, frustrated, hopeless, anonymous, dehumanized and emasculated (Zimbardo 256), simply because they were obeying rules. The authoritarian nature of the guards became serious when they insulted the prisoners, threatened them, were physically aggressive, used instruments to keep the prisoners in line and referred to them in impersonal, anonymous, deprecating ways (260). In order to fit into the setting the guards were in competition with each other to be stronger and more respected. They wanted to follow the behavior of the good guards [which] seemed more motivated by a desire to be liked by everyone in the system than by a concern for the inmates welfare (261). We learn that if the setting requires an individual to become an authoritarian, others will be submissive and obedient towards them. Also, the expectations to follow authority are highly regarded until a shift in viewpoint occurs within the individuals. A shift in viewpoint occurs when an individual realizes what they have done or are doing is not civilized and wrong. The essence of obedience is that a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another persons wishes, and he therefore no longer regards himself as responsible for his actions (Milgram 231). After the shift in viewpoint, obedience follows and the individuals dont regard themselves as being responsible for their own actions. The individuals feel responsible to the authority thats directing them but not responsible for their actions done in return to the command of the authority. An example in Milgrams experiment was a woman, Gretchen Brandt, who refused to continue on with the experiment after she administered 210 volts. We came here of our free will. If he wants to continue Ill go aheadIm sorry. I dont want to be responsible for anything happening to him. I wouldnt like it for me either. (Milgram 223). She kept proceeding at the experimenters command until she realized that she had the freedom and right to refuse. She did not want to be held responsible for the harm of the learner so she implicitly tried to leave the blame on the experimenter. In Zimbardos experiment, a prison guard gave his perspective on what it felt like to be a guard in the experiment: What made this experiment most depressing for me was the fact that we were continually called upon to act in a way that was contrary to what I really felt inside. I dont feel like Im the type of person that would be a guard-it just didnt seem like me, and to continually keep up and put on a face like that is just really one of the most oppressive things you can do. Its almost like a prison that you create yourself-you get into it, and it becomes almost the definition you make of yourself. (261)  The guard implies that you become a prisoner of your own obedience. He treated the prisoners unfairly because he wanted to be seen as a good prison guard. As a result, at the end of the experiments, the teachers and prison guards dont see themselves as being responsible for their actions; they hold others responsible for their actions. The teachers implicitly blame the experimenter and the prison guards implicitly blame the higher authority. In order to be obedient, individuals must be provoked by some sort of authority for the shift of viewpoint to prevail and become successful. Milgram implies that, [obedience is] socially organized evil in modern society (233). Therefore, in conclusion, obedience is a vice because it is an immoral practice, which causes human beings to play the blame-game in life.

Japans Genpei War, 1180 - 1185

Japan's Genpei War, 1180 - 1185 Date: 1180-1185 Location: Honshu and Kyushu, Japan Outcome: Minamoto clan prevails and almost wipes out Taira; Heian era ends and Kamakura shogunate begins The Genpei War (also romanized as Gempei War) in Japan was the first conflict between large samurai factions.  Although it happened nearly 1,000 years ago, people today still remember the names and accomplishments of some of the great warriors who fought in this civil war. Sometimes compared with Englands War of the Roses, the Genpei War featured two families fighting for power.  White was the clan color of the Minamoto, like the House of York, while the Taira used red like the Lancasters.  However, the Genpei War predated the Wars of the Roses by three hundred years.  In addition, the Minamoto and Taira were not fighting to take the throne of Japan; instead, each wanted to control the imperial succession. Lead-up to the War The Taira and Minamoto clans were rival powers behind the throne. They sought to control the emperors by having their own favorite candidates take the throne.  In the Hogen Disturbance of 1156 and the Heiji Disturbance of 1160, though, it was the Taira who came out on top.   Both families had daughters who had married into the imperial line.  However, after the Taira victories in the disturbances, Taira no Kiyomori became the Minister of State; as a result, he was able to ensure that his daughters three-year-old son became the next emperor in March of 1180.  It was the enthronement of little Emperor Antoku that led the Minamoto to revolt. War Breaks Out On May 5, 1180, Minamoto Yoritomo and his favored candidate for the throne, Prince Mochihito, sent out a call to war.  They rallied samurai families related to or allied with the Minamoto, as well as warrior monks from various Buddhist monasteries.  By June 15, Minister Kiyomori had issued a warrant for his arrest, so Prince Mochihito was forced to flee Kyoto and seek refuge in the monastery of Mii-dera.  With thousands of Taira troops marching toward the monastery, the prince and 300 Minamoto warriors raced south toward Nara, where additional warrior monks would reinforce them. The exhausted prince had to stop to rest, however, so the Minamoto forces took refuge with the monks at the easily defensible monastery of Byodo-in.  They hoped that monks from Nara would arrive to reinforce them before the Taira army did.  Just in case, however, they tore the planks from the only bridge across the river to Byodo-in. At first light the next day, June 20, the Taira army marched quietly up to Byodo-in, hidden by thick fog.  The Minamoto suddenly heard the Taira war-cry  and replied with their own.  A fierce battle followed, with monks and samurai firing arrows through the mist at one another.  Soldiers from the Tairas allies, the Ashikaga, forded the river and pressed the attack.  Prince Mochihito tried to escape to Nara in the chaos, but the Taira caught up with him and executed him.  The Nara monks marching toward Byodo-in heard that they were too late to help the Minamoto, and turned back.  Minamoto Yorimasa, meanwhile, committed the first classical seppuku in history, writing a death poem on his war-fan, and then cutting open his own abdomen. It seemed that the Minamoto revolt and thus the Genpei War had come to an abrupt end.  In vengeance, the Taira sacked and burned the monasteries that had offered aid to the Minamoto, slaughtering thousands of monks and burning Kofuku-ji and Todai-ji in Nara to the ground. Yoritomo Takes Over The leadership of the Minamoto clan passed to the 33-year-old Minamoto no Yoritomo, who was living as a hostage in the home of a Taira-allied family.  Yoritomo soon learned that there was a bounty on his head.  He organized some local Minamoto allies, and escaped from the Taira, but lost most of his small army in the Battle of Ishibashiyama on September 14.  Yoritomo escaped with his life, fleeing into the woods with Taira pursuers close behind.   Yoritomo made it to the town of Kamakura, which was solidly Minamoto territory.  He called in reinforcements from all of the allied families in the area.  On November 9, 1180, at the so-called Battle of the Fujigawa (Fuji River), the Minamoto and allies faced an over-extended Taira army.  With poor leadership and long supply lines, the Taira decided to withdraw back to Kyoto without offering a fight.   A hilarious and likely exaggerated account of the events at Fujigawa in the Heiki Monogatari claims that a flock of water-fowl on the river marshes was started into flight in the middle of the night.  Hearing the thunder of their wings, the Taira soldiers panicked and fled, grabbing bows without arrows or taking their arrows but leaving their bows.  The record even claims that Taira troops were mounting tethered animals and whipping them up so that they galloped round and round the post to which they were tied. Whatever the true cause of the Taira retreat, there followed a two-year lull in the fighting.  Japan faced a series of droughts and floods that destroyed the rice and barley crops in 1180 and 1181.  Famine and disease ravaged the countryside; an estimated 100,000 died.  Many people blamed the Taira, who had slaughtered monks and burned down temples.  They believed that the Taira had brought down the wrath of the gods with their impious actions, and noted that Minamoto lands did not suffer as badly as those controlled by the Taira. Fighting began again in July of 1182, and the Minamoto had a new champion called Yoshinaka, a rough-hewn cousin of Yoritomos, but an excellent general.  As Minamoto Yoshinaka won skirmishes against the Taira  and considered marching on Kyoto, Yoritomo grew increasingly concerned about his cousins ambitions.  He sent an army against Yoshinaka in the spring of 1183, but the two sides managed to negotiate a settlement rather than fighting one another. Fortunately for them, the Taira were in disarray.  They had conscripted a huge army, marching forth on May 10, 1183, but were so disorganized that their food ran out just nine miles east of Kyoto.  The officers ordered the conscripts to plunder food as they passed from their own provinces, which were just recovering from the famine.  This prompted mass desertions. As they entered Minamoto territory, the Taira divided their army into two forces.  Minamoto Yoshinaka managed to lure the larger section into a narrow valley; at the Battle of Kurikara, according to the epics, Seventy thousand horsemen of the Taira perish[ed], buried in this one deep valley; the mountain streams ran with their blood... This would prove the turning point in the Genpei War. Minamoto In-Fighting Kyoto erupted in panic at the news of the Taira defeat in Kurikara.  On August 14, 1183, the Taira fled the capital.  They took along most of the imperial family, including the child emperor, and the crown jewels.  Three days later, Yoshinakas branch of the Minamoto army marched into Kyoto, accompanied by the former Emperor Go-Shirakawa. Yoritomo was nearly as panicked as the Taira were by his cousins triumphal march.  However, Yoshinaka soon earned the hatred of the citizens of Kyoto, allowing his troops to pillage and rob people regardless of their political affiliation.  In February of 1184, Yoshinaka heard that Yoritomos army was coming to the capital to expel him, led by another cousin, Yoritomos courtly younger brother Minamoto Yoshitsune.  Yoshitsunes men quickly dispatched Yoshinakas army.  Yoshinakas wife, the famous female samurai Tomoe Gozen, is said to have escaped after taking a head as a trophy.  Yoshinaka himself was beheaded while trying to escape on February 21, 1184. End of the War and Aftermath: What remained of the Taira loyalist army retreated into their heartland.  It took the Minamoto some time to mop them up.  Almost a year after Yoshitsune ousted his cousin from Kyoto, in February of 1185, the Minamoto seized the Taira fortress and make-shift capital at Yashima.   On March 24, 1185, the final major battle of the Genpei War took place.  It was a naval battle in the Shimonoseki Strait, a half-day fight called the Battle of Dan-no-ura. Minamoto no Yoshitsune commanded his clans fleet of 800 ships, while Taira no Munemori led the Taira fleet, 500 strong.  The Taira were more familiar with the tides and currents in the area, so initially were able to surround the larger Minamoto fleet and pin them down with long-range archery shots.  The fleets closed in for hand-to-hand combat, with samurai leaping aboard their opponents ships and fighting with long and short swords.  As the battle wore on, the turning tide forced the Taira ships up against the rocky coastline, pursued by the Minamoto fleet. When the tides of battle turned against them, so to speak, many of the Taira samurai jumped into the sea to drown rather than being killed by the Minamoto.  The seven-year-old Emperor Antoku and his grandmother also jumped in and perished.  Local people believe that small crabs that live in the Shimonoseki Strait are possessed by the ghosts of the Taira samurai; the crabs have a pattern on their shells that looks like a samurais face. After the Genpei War, Minamoto Yoritomo formed the first bakufu and ruled as Japans first shogun from his capital at Kamakura.  The Kamakura shogunate was the first of various bakufu that would rule the country until 1868  when the Meiji Restoration returned political power to the emperors. Ironically, within thirty years of the Minamoto victory in the Genpei War, political power would be usurped from them by regents (shikken) from the Hojo clan.  And who were they?  Well, the Hojo were a branch of the Taira family. Sources Arnn, Barbara L.  Local Legends of the Genpei War: Reflections of Medieval Japanese History, Asian Folklore Studies, 38:2 (1979), pp. 1-10. Conlan, Thomas.  The Nature of Warfare in Fourteenth-Century Japan: The Record of Nomoto Tomoyuki, Journal for Japanese Studies, 25:2 (1999), pp. 299-330. Hall, John W.  The Cambridge History of Japan, Vol. 3, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1990). Turnbull, Stephen.  The Samurai: A Military History, Oxford: Routledge (2013).