In Stanley Milgram's article, "The Perils of Obedience," the Yale Psychologist suggests that authority and obedience are essential in the "structure of social life" which leads into a discussion about authority, obedience, and the natural aggression of a person. Conservatives argued that disobedience to authority created social disorder, while humanists stressed importance of personal conscience. Submission to an authority creates a problem when orders are in conflict with the conscience of a person. In Milgram's experiment, the dilemma is between the desire to impress a superior and the guilt caused by inflicting pain on an innocent person.
             Milgram conducted an experiment to see how much pain an ordinary person would inflict on an innocent stranger while under the guidance of an Experimental Psychologist. The experiment called for two people to come into the laboratory under the outlook of doing tests concerned with memory and learning. People were selected from a wide cross section of the general public. The two people were given one of two roles in the experiment, the "Teacher" and the "Learner." The part of the Teacher was the real subject of the experiment, while an actor who had been previously instructed by the experimenter played the part of the Learner. The test subjects were told they were going to be doing tests involving word association. The Teacher was told to react to incorrect answers by sending steadily increasing electrical shocks to the Learner.
             The buttons that activated the shocks were labeled on the device and ranged from mild to extremely dangerous (Milgram 316-328).
             This paragraph will discuss the way I feel about certain things that came from "The Perils of Obedience." Milgram asked various people what they thought the results would be in such a test and most people did not believe that a normal person could be induced into severely...