Obedience to authority

[deb1]

When I took Psychology in College I was both fascinated and troubled by a experiment from 1963.

In the experiment, the participant was told that they would be conducting a project to see how punishment assists a person to learn.

The participant was told that they were to administer ever increasing shocks to an unseen person(Who was actually in on the whole experiment)

A scientist sat in the room with the participant. When the unseen person got a question incorrect, the scientist prodded the participant to apply ever increasing electric shocks to the other person.

I think that something like 2/3rds of the participant took the shocks to the highest level, even thought they showed obvious signs of stress and tension for doing so.

I think that the experiment is interesting in that it leads one to question at what point one begins to question authority.

here is a link to an article about the study.

holah.karoo.net/milgramstudy.htm

I thought that it would be an interesting question for this forum. At what point are we responsible for standing against those in authority? Or maybe even, at what point is a person responsible or not responsible for following orders?

 

[Della]

I saw a report on this experiment on TV a few months ago. People want to be helpful and if they are getting paid to do something and need the money, they will do things they might not otherwise do. But, the Church doesn’t ask this kind of blind obedience. We are to properly form our consciences so that we know right from wrong.

I’ll give you an example. For 25 years my Lay Carmelite community followed the directives of our superiors (when they gave us any) with no qualms. But then they started adding more and more additions to the statutes that became more and more restrictive until they violated our rights as Catholics, let alone as Lay Carmelites. We tried to reason it out, but no one in the leadership would even answer our calls and letters. We tired hard to conform to everything they wanted, but even then nothing we did pleased them, when they made their semi-annual rounds of the various communities. Finally, for the sake of our spiritual health and mental sanity, we disassociated ourselves from the Carmelites. We may not be formal members but now we can apply to be a lay association with Carmelite spirituality with our diocese, which we are currently doing. We didn’t just roll over and let our leadership do whatever they wanted, even when it was unjust or impossible for us to do what they wanted. It’s been hard and painful, but we know we have made the right decision for us and all within the proper rules and regs of the Church. Sometimes we have to answer to a higher obedience than that of man, even if we suffer for it.

(If anyone wants to discuss Lay Carmel and our decision to disassociate from it, please start another thread–I only brought it up here as an example. Thank you! )

 

[Texas_Roofer]

…At what point are we responsible for standing against those in authority? Or maybe even, at what point is a person responsible or not responsible for following orders?

It is based on Natural Law when authority is in tune with Natural Law we are obedient and follow. If authority opposes Natural Law you do not follow authority. In your post someone is being hurt but why? Natural Law would not allow one to injury another for unknown reason so you would not follow such authority.