Video Transcript

How often have you heard someone say, “If I were you, I would have acted differently?" You have probably said it yourself. But is that really true?

For example, if i was your boss and I ordered you to perform some action that went against your inner values, would you do it because it was your job?

It is easy to say that you would not betray your own inner values in some theoretical situation but can you do it in real life?

Do you have the internal integrity to stand against that authority figure?

Before you answer that, here is an interesting psychological study that was done in the 1960’s and 1970’s that helps shed some light on how adults actually respond in what they perceive to be a real life situation.

In the 1960’s Stanley Milgram, a famous and sometimes considered infamous experimental psychologist, devised an experiment that would explore the willingness of individuals to follow the orders of authorities when those orders conflicted with the individual's own moral judgment.

These experiments are referred to as the Stanley Milgram Obedience Studies.

Here’s how the experiment worked.

A test subject who we will call the “teacher” was to control a machine that would administer an electric shock to the learner whenever the learner failed to correctly answer a given question. The teacher was told that the research project was designed to determine the possible beneficial effects of utilizing electric shocks as an aid in the learning process.

Before the actual learning test began the teacher was wired to the device and received a mild test shock so the teacher would know the device was working.

There were two other participants in this experiment. One was a research scientist that assumed the role of the authority figure. The other was the learner. The learner was actually a fellow researcher who was playing the role of the one being tested and wired to the electrical shocking device. The learner’s verbal response was pre-recorded and thus, the same throughout these experiments. He was not visible to the teacher but the booth was wired for sound so that the teacher would hear the pre-recorded responses and even the confederate’s pounding on the wall begging for the experiment to end.

At first, the shocks were mild but with each wrong answer, the intensity of the shocks would be increased. The test machine clearly labeled the strength of the shock that was being administered to the learner. The control panel even provided warnings that at a certain level the strength of the shocks could result in death.

With each wrong answer, the fictitious electric shocks intensified in strength. The learner’s responses also intensified from a mild initial response, to cries of pain and finally pleas for the experiment to end because it was causing the learner so much pain. When the warning labels were ignored, eventually the cries of pain ceased leading the teacher to believe that the experiment had resulted in the death of the learner.

Throughout the experiment the “research scientist” was in the room and each time an incorrect answer was given, the authority figure told the teacher to administer the intensifying shocks. The authority figure told the test subject (the teacher) that the researcher was taking all the responsibility for the project and that it was the teacher’s duty to do their job and to proceed with the experiment.

The actual goal of the experiment was to pit obedience to authority against one’s refusal to participate in an obviously immoral act.

How many of the teachers would blindly follow orders even when it could eventually result in the death of the learner?

You would hope the answer would be none. But since there are some sadists in the world, perhaps 1 in 100 or 1,000 might be willing to go all the way.

Milgram was shocked by the results. In his first test using 40 Yale University undergrad students, 25 of the 40 administered what they believed to be potentially lethal shocks to the supposed learner.

Perhaps the reason for 5 out of 8 going all the way was because the test subjects were Yale college students who had a high desire to please or some other excuse for their seemingly immoral behavior. Yet, when the Milgram experiment was repeated elsewhere, the subject populations were even more likely to follow authority. On average two of every three people tested went all the way.

Milgram summed up the study by remarking that the fundamental lesson learned from the study was that ordinary people, simply doing their jobs without any malice on their part, can become agents in a terribly destructive project. Although one believes that they would never participate in a project like the Nazi death camps, relatively few people actually have the internal resources to resist authority. We tend to abdicate personal responsibility for our actions and morals whenever some authority figure is willing to accept that responsibility in our place. Few have a thought system that is willing to accept responsibility for living authentically with their self-proclaimed values.

We are quick to judge others and claim that if we were them, we would have done something different. This experiment leads one to seriously doubt such a claim. If your self-identity has been determined by outside forces, your willingness to stand for your own internal principles will be weak in the face of authority. After all, you have been preprogramed to believe your worth is determined by others whom you perceive to be in authority over your identity.

The results of Milgram's study is well known in the advertising community and has profound implications on how susceptible the individual is to external pressures. Yet most people are unaware of their mind’s susceptibility to outside influences.

This and other psychological research is being used to control the individual’s ability to freely decide for themselves what principles will guide their lives. Society tells us what roles we are to play and we blindly comply. In our youth, judgmental labels are placed on all things and thus, become the governing criteria for our lives. Our self-worth is predetermined by outside forces that judge, reward and punish. We are taught what to think, not how to think freely for ourselves. But you can free yourself from this harmful indoctrination.

The good news is that some did not buckle under to these outside pressures and chose to live authentically with their internal values and morals. More likely than not, they too were the products of societies’ fear-based thought system. Yet, they found a way to resist.

Follow up research showed that those who remained true to their own values shared a strong internal focus. Their worth was self-determined. They knew they alone were responsible for their own self-identity and were determined to live their truth no matter what the consequences. They had developed a thought system that was able to withstand these outside pressures to conform.

Note that in March 2017 a more recent study that included both women and men, the result of the Milgram study was once again duplicated. Things have not changed for the better.

The bad news is that we live in a high tech world in which manipulation of the individual is easier, more pervasive and insidious than ever before. Individual indoctrination and brainwashing has been raised to the level of a high tech science. Your fears are stoked and false desires generated. Computer algorithms are specifically designed to make the individual believe that they are freely deciding to select an already predetermined answer established by the powers to be. The good news is that when you realize how vulnerable your mind is to outside manipulation you can at least become consciously aware of some of these outside influences. You can guard your own values and protect your self-identity.

The truth is that if I were you with your background, your beliefs, your indoctrination, your fears, and your past experiences, I would react the same way you did. Why?

Because everyone is always acting as rationally as their current level of fears will allow. Coming from that same identical background I would have responded similarly because that was the most logical way in that moment to reduce my level of fear.

Just remember that as a continuous learner with each new experience, you gain additional feedback, learn new skills and responses so that tomorrow you can respond differently than what you did today. Although today, based on the Milgram study, I might choose to go all the way, tomorrow I can decide to follow my own internal guide and take full responsibility for my actions and say I quit.

So what would you do if you were me?

Create a great day for yourself and your world.

Tom Wakechild