Over the centuries, kings, priests, feudal lords, industrialists, and the parents, everyone who was older or on the higher position, insisted that obedience is a virtue and disobedience is a sin. Messianic prophets’ concepts confirmed the idea that the man was right to be disobedient, that he was not corrupted by his “sin,” the man was released from the shackles of pre-human harmony (Fromm 683). The man continued to develop through the acts of disobedience. Possible for him has become not only his spiritual development, because there were people who dared to say “no” to the powers that was in the name of their conscience or their faith; the intellectual development depended on the ability to disobey – not to obey authorities who tried to silence a new idea, not to obey the authorities of the long-established views, according to which any innovation is a nonsense.
Here it is a must to mention the events in the movie “You Don’t Know Jack” where the doctor was fighting for the legalization of euthanasia sincerely desiring to stop the suffering of incurably ill patients (veoh.com). Euthanasia is the practice of stopping (or reducing) of human life, suffering from an incurable disease, experiencing unbearable suffering; satisfying the requests without medical indications in a painless or minimally painful form in order to stop suffering.
The term “euthanasia” was first used by Francis Bacon in the XVI century to the definition of “easy death”.
The most famous proponent of euthanasia, who was actively implementing his views on the practice, is Jack Kevorkian. More commonly he is known as “Doctor Death”. This American doctor helped to leave this world more than 130 patients, and the last step they made on their own: Kevorkian connected them to the device of his own invention, and they pressed the button, entering a mortal drug intravenously or through the mask for breathing.
At trial, Dr. Kevorkian under oath showed that he believed the euthanasia was his professional and human duty, and that despite knowing that this practice is illegal, he consciously was practicing this act of civil disobedience.
Demanding the legalization of euthanasia, Jack was struggling not only with the laws of America at the time, but with people who did not support his ideas because of their religious beliefs (veoh.com). He challenged on the moral principles of the society he lived in and tried with all the sorts of ways to explain why euthanasia is not an evil.
However, not all disobedience is the good, and not all obedience is a sin.
Obedience to the person, institution or authority (heteronomous obedience) is a submission; it involves the rejection of your own autonomy and acceptance of another's will or opinion instead of yours (Fromm 684). Following your own reason, your mind or belief (autonomous obedience) appears to be not an act of submission – it is the act of approval.
In addition, it is worth mentioning here of two concepts: the concept of conscience and the concept of authority. The term “conscience” is used for the expression of two phenomena, quite different from each other. One is “authoritarian conscience”, internalized voice of authority, which we try to satisfy and fear to anger (Fromm 685). In contrast to the authoritarian humanistic conscience exists: it is the inner voice, open to everyone, independent of external sanctions and incentives. Humanistic conscience is based on the idea that we as humans possess an intuitive knowledge of what is humanely and what is inhumane, what contributes to life what destroys it.
In addition, it is necessary to distinguish the “irrational” authority of the “rational” (Fromm 685). An example of submission to rational authority is the relationship between student and teacher, an example of submission to the irrational – slave and slave-owner relationship.
An individual can become independent through the act of disobedience by learning to say “no” to the authorities (Fromm 686). However, not only the ability to disobey is a condition of freedom – freedom, in turn, is a condition of disobedience. Dr. Kevorkian, as was shown in the film “You Don’t Know Jack” (veoh.com), was not afraid to tell the authorities “no” and continued to actively defend his views over the years.
Opinions and Social Pressure (Solomon E. Asch)
Each of us would agree with such a trivial fact that society shapes the behavior, opinions and beliefs of the person. As for psychologists, the group pressure on the individual consciousness raises for them a lot of questions to which they would like to get a comprehensive answer.
The modern era, along with the unprecedented technological progress in the field of communication, has also brought to social relations the conscious manipulation of people and “technology of the consent”. There are many reasons why ordinary people and scientists are interested in finding out how people adopt their views, form their opinions, and what role is played by the social conditions.
The basic theoretical background studies conducted from 19th to 20th centuries now are generally accepted and largely determine what the majority of people say and think about the propaganda techniques and the manipulation. These backgrounds consist in the fact that people are easily and painlessly amenable to external manipulation by means of suggestion or influence of prestige and that any idea can be “popular” or “unpopular”, regardless of its true value (Asch 32). However, we are skeptical about the assumption that the social pressure will certainly lead to weak-willed subordination. A person is also inherent to the independence and ability to overcome the group preferences. The same situation could be seen in the case of Dr. Kevorkian, who was striving against the constant views of society, trying to convince the society that euthanasia for terminally ill people becomes a salvation, not a murder (veoh.com).
Moreover, there could be raised a question from a psychological point of view: is it possible to systematically change the views of the person on the situation or object without having previously changed the person’s knowledge and understanding of them. Solomon E. Asch in his article ‘Opinions and Social Pressure’ have described a few experimental researches on the effects of group pressure he had conducted with the support of several assistants. These researches do not only demonstrate the possibility of group pressure on the individual, but also illustrate the new methods for solving of this problem, and put the questions that have yet to be answered.
According to the test, subjects could choose whether to act independently, rejecting the opinion of the majority, or agree with the majority, not to listen to their own feelings. Of the 123 subjects who have passed through the test, many have agreed with the majority opinion (Asch 33). Among the independent individuals were many who firmly insisted on their own, confident in their own correctness. Here, the most noteworthy is that they not blankly listened to the answers of the majority, but they were able to overcome the doubts and restore inner balance. A great disturbing was caused by the subjects’ reactions, when they considered their differences from the majority as the evidence of their own shortcomings that must be hidden at all costs. So they were desperately trying to join the majority, without thinking about consequences. And compliant people did not take into account the reasons why they have agreed with the majority.
The presence of a partner that supports the independent subject had considerably weakened the influence of the majority (Asch 34). Even the weakest person no longer behaved as obediently as before. The most interesting was the reaction to the partner. In general, the subject showed to him a feeling of warmth and closeness: partner inspired the subject with confidence. And the subject did not even doubt the independence of the partner opinion.
The most surprising fact discovered in the experiments with the loss of a partner, who supported the test subject in his convictions: the initial presence of a partner or joint opposition with him to the majority does not increase the independence of the subject later, after the “betrayal” of the partner (Asch 34).
Dr. Kevorkian was succeeding in implementing his ideas into reality not only thanks to his perseverance and confidence in the correctness of his beliefs, but also thanks to the people who supported him: close friends, sister, and even a lawyer who wanted to help Jack in order to build his career owing to the high-profile case. Even when his close friend appeared to be ill with an incurable cancer, he was strongly willing to help her to stop the suffering. And then he shared with her the story about his mother, who died in hospital on his eyes after a long suffering, and no one could stop this suffering, except death (veoh.com). Perhaps, this story of Jack has become the main incentive to fight for the legalization of euthanasia.
Life in society implies a consensus as an essential condition. But the consensus is inherently productive, still requires the person to sacrifice the independence of his own actions and thoughts. When consensus leads to the dominance of conformality, social processes in the community are distorted and the individual becomes dependent on those forces which determine his feelings and thoughts. In his studies, Solomon E. Asch with his assistants has found that the tendency to conformality in the society is so strong that even well educated and intelligent young people for this reason call the white black (Asch 35). All this is stimulating reflections about the features of our education and the values that guide our behavior.
Works Cited
Asch, Solomon. “Opinions and Social Pressure” Scientific American 193.5 (1955): 31-35. Print
anti-theist. “You Don't Know Jack.” Online video clip. veoh. veoh, 2016. Web. 10 Jul. 2016. <http://www.veoh.com/watch/v21050025Wx8xqw6a >
Fromm, Erich. On Disobedience and Other Essays. New York: Seabury Press, 1981. Print.
