Moral Responsibility in Societal Professions

Milgram and Mcintyre QQCT Quotations: Milgram - ‘It is quite true’, he says, ‘that this is almost a philosophical position, because we have learned that some people are psychologically incapable of disengaging themselves. But that doesn’t relieve them of the moral responsibility’. Mcintyre - “According to their ethical code, they have an obligation to keep confidential information to themselves even when they have no legal right to do so.This puts sociologists in a different position than lawyers and doctors. Communication between lawyers and clients and between doctors and patients is legally privileged. Lawyers and physicians have not only an ethical duty to keep information confidential but the legal right to do so. Sociologists, on the other hand, have no such clear legal right, although they do have an ethical duty.’ From the Milgram reading I found Milgram's response to the criticism he received for his experiment very interesting as what he stated was, in fact, a true statement but also awfully harsh. In the Mcintyre reading I was able to learn that sociologists do not have the legal premise to keep their research subject’s information private but still should as it would be unethical not to. Questions: To what extent is the basis of the professions society values a result of prestige, and how does that affect the career interests in individuals? How significant is the difference between ‘careers’ and ‘professions’ such that ‘professions’ gain more rights and prestige in the societal and legal world? Connection: Milgrim argues that despite how hard it is for a person to resist from doing something immoral, whether it be pressure, desire, or convenience, they are still morally responsible for their actions. With that being said, I agree with him to an extent such that I think moral responsibility depends on context. In the case of the Milgram experiment, I can understand why there is criticism as he did put mental and emotional strain on the subjects. However, within the experiment he did state that the subjects were able to leave whenever they felt so. The intensity of the experiment and emotional strain, however, could have overpowered their thoughts and potentially made them forget about their choice. Additionally, according to the transcript there was not violent pressure being put upon the subject to keep going with the experiment, rather it was just the experimenter repeatedly saying that the ‘experiment must go on’. Thus, because there was no literal physical force against the subject, they were technically allowed to withdraw from the experiment. Moreover, the subjects were in a very vulnerable stage to which their moral reasoning could be questioned at the time due to their two big stressors: the screaming learner and persistent experimenter. However, I believe at the end of the day, with all things considered, the subjects were under unexpected stress which makes them not morally responsible for their actions, unlike what Milligram believes. Nonetheless, when immoral actions that someone under their own control are committed, the individual is held accountable. Takeaway: Miligram in this article is making the point that Americans, and humans in general, are very obedient beings despite stressors that may be put upon them. He conducted an experiment to test obedience to observe the difference between German obedience and Americans, to prove that there is something different about Germans. However, after conducting the experiment it was evident that humans, as a whole, are obedient. Additionally, he discovered the state of agency, which is a shift in mindset where someone else takes authority, altering someone’s actions. In this state, most people will do whatever is told of them despite the conflict that resides in their conscience. This is what Milgram proposes happened within his experiment and why so many people were able to follow Hitler’s orders.