Rebecca Temerario
The Power of Peer Pressure on Man’s Law
Since the beginning of time, man has unconsciously tested the extent to which people obey. Psychology and Sociology were developed in the late 19th century in order to research the human mind and the influence of groups upon others, ultimately seeking to discover what makes man tick. Nearly a century later, two psychologists, Stanley Milgram and Phillip Zimbardo, created experiments that pinpointed why human beings are inclined to obey man-made law above moral law. Erich Fromm, a psychoanalyst, wrote about the historical evidence behind the inclination of man to obey nonsensical, immoral laws given by man, rather than moral laws. These studies all proved that man’s law is regarded as higher and more powerful than moral law because of societal peer pressure.
These statistical studies show, as history notes, that the majority of human beings will obey an outrageous command given by an authority figure, who commands someone of lower rank to carry out immoral actions. In Fromm’s essay, ‘Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem,’ he states: “For centuries, kings, priests, feudal lords, industrial bosses, and parents have insisted that obedience is a virtue and disobedience is a vice. In order to introduce another point of view, let us set against this position the following statement: human history began with an act of disobedience, and it is not unlikely that it will be terminated by an act of obedience” (Fromm 357). That statement would explain why children are scolded if they disobey a rule at home or at school, or why adults are fired from jobs if they do not follow orders at work. Obedience has become the key to achieving positive recognition. As such, we unconsciously learn to place our morals on the back-burner.
For centuries religions have told the story of Adam and Eve, taking care each time to mention how God’s first two human creations disobeyed His rules. The Devil tempted Eve to eat an apple. She crumpled under peer pressure, and Adam followed suit. Clearly, humans are inclined to obey the visible authority figure over the more moral rules set by those one cannot see.
Milgram conducted an experiment in which a “teacher” was instructed to shock a “learner” whenever he gave a wrong answer to a word pair. Several “teachers” protested against the experiment, but the authority figure in the lab coat overseeing the experiment told them to continue, so the “teacher” acquiesced. Milgram noted that the “teachers” were less inclined to obey the authority figure when the experiment was conducted over the phone (Milgram 323). Just as driving “under the influence” of intoxication reduces the driver’s ability to make good judgments on the road, peer pressure puts people “under the influence” and impairs their sense of right from wrong.
Zimbardo recruited male college students for his obedience to authority oriented experiment, which became known as the ‘Stanford Prison Experiment.’ The students were randomly selected to role-play as either prison guards or prisoners. The guards were given vague instructions to maintain “law and order” in the mock prison (Zimbardo 347). The guards forced the prisoners to do an endless amount of push-ups, eat food that they didn’t like, and clean toilets with their hands. The extent to which the guards exerted their obscene man-made laws over their helpless prisoners caused the experiment to come to an early and abrupt end. Zimbardo reflected on his experiment, saying, “It was remarkable how readily we all slipped into our roles, temporarily gave up our identities, and allowed these assigned roles and social forces in the situation to guide shape, and eventually control our freedom of thought and action” (Zimbardo 349). The prisoners gave into the peer pressure of the guards, and the guards gave into their roles, all the while forgetting that this was merely and experiment.
Through the experiments pioneered by Milgram and Zimbardo, we see how people bend and morph their moral standards to mesh with that of the man-made law. Milgram’s electrical shocks revealed that people could be manipulated to hurt others (something considered morally wrong) if an authority figure instructed them to do so. Zimbardo’s experiment showed that, when provided the liberty to exert your will over others in a helpless position, people will. Milgram explains such actions of people to revert to sadism when give the opportunity as such, “One theoretical interpretation of this behavior holds that all people harbor deeply aggressive instincts continually pressing for expression, and that the experiment provides institutional justification for the release of these impulses” (Milgram 321). Both experiments show that the impulses Milgram refers to are more prone to be activated when peer pressure is exerted.
Peer pressure is a threat that should be acknowledged in today’s society. Since the moment of human creation, its weight has always been apparent. Through time immemorial, our actions have become immoral. From Adam and Eve, to Nazi Germany, to teenagers who have shoplifted, peer pressure has always been the voice of “reason.”
Works Cited
Behrens, Laurence and Leonard J. Rosen, eds. Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. 9th ed. New York: Pearson, 2005.
Fromm, Erich. “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem.” Behrens and Rosen 356-362.
Milgram, Stanley. “The Perils of Obedience.” Behrens and Rosen 313-326.
Zimbardo, Phillip. “The Stanford Prison Experiment.” Behrens and Rosen 344-356.