Is Disobedience a Psychological and Moral Problem free essay sample

He states the disobedience and the willpower to say no and doubt are some of things that may prevent human beings form destroying the Earth. While Erich Fromm’s essay is certainly interesting to read, some of his ideas and statements are outrageous. It is because of these claims I have to partially disagree with the general idea with his essay. In the following paragraphs I will be showing, contrary to Fromm’s idea, that both disobedience and obedience are good and bad. In his essay â€Å"Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem,† Erich Fromm discuses in depth the differences between disobedience and obedience. He asks why an individual finds it hard to disobey, or why an individual very easily obeys. He also writes about the different types of obedience and disobedience and the effects of these two acts on the human world. Fromm states â€Å"Human history began with an act of Deonandan 2 disobedience, and it is not unlikely that it will be terminated by an act of obedience. We will write a custom essay sample on Is Disobedience a Psychological and Moral Problem? or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page † (402) He seems to believe that obeying without question might have serious consequences for human beings. He also states that if an individual decides to disobey, that individual must be willing to be alone. That individual must be willing to be one in a million when he or she disobeys. He goes on to state that there are different types of obedience; heteronymous and autonomous. While heteronymous obedience is obedience to another, autonomous is obedience to oneself. He also points out there are also two types of consciences; authoritarian and humanistic. While humanistic conscience is the part of humans that is not affected by anyone, authoritarian is the part that is influenced by others, although we are not always aware of this. Fromm claims that this authoritarian conscience is the one we always want to please. We want to please it so much that sometimes we go against our humanistic conscience. He furthers points out for an individual to obey one form of conscience, that individual may be disobeying the other form of conscience. That is to say if you were to obey what you think society think is right, you would be disobeying what you truly believe in. He then goes on to state that there are two types of authority; rational and irrational. With rational authority, all parties that are involved are not harmed or hurt in anyway, but they all reap the benefits of their actions, with irrational authority only the authoritative party reaps the benefits, the other party only gets harmed. He states that only when individuals is free to think for themselves are they able to disobey authority. Therefore freedom and disobedience goes hand in hand. He also states that although human beings have not lost the willpower to Deonandan 3 disobey, they obey without questioning or doubting. When they do this, they are termed an â€Å"organization man. when human beings become this type of person, they have the potential to end all life on Earth. This is so Deonandan 3 because they do not feel responsible for their actions and do not care what the consequences of their actions may be. Fromm uses certain religious, social and cultural occurrences and stories that he considers significant to his idea that disobedience and obedience without questioning is bad. He does this by citing biblical and Greek myths and stories. He also seems to be influenced by the cold war, a time when the end of the world was always on people’s mind. He tries to convince his readers by targeting their emotions and morals. He does this through statements such as â€Å"At the same time the slave tries to defend as best he can his claims for a minimum of happiness† (405) and â€Å" And so would we- and so do we. † (406) While Fromm tries to win his readers by doing this, he does not seem to realize that some of readers may not be aware of some of the stories and occurrences. He does not think that some readers may not find some of his references influential. He also seems to think that individuals will believe him, regardless to the absence of facts in his essay. Erich Fromm claims that human beings came into existence because of certain acts of disobedience. I strongly disagree with this statement. I do so because Fromm provides only stories and myths as basis for his claims. He does not provide any hard core facts. While some readers may believe this claim, I can assure you they only do this because of cultural and religious convictions. When he points out that human beings have progressed because of acts of disobedience, I partially agree. I think that we as human Deonandan 4 eings have made huge strides socially because of some acts of disobedience. Some of these include the abolition of slavery, democracy and social equality. I also realize that while these may be seen as acts of disobedience to authority(rulers and masters) but they must also be seen as obedience to moral and ethical laws. I also disagree with his question, â€Å" why is man so prone to obey and why is it so difficult for to disobey? †(405) I think that humans ha ve to have something to obey because without something to obey we would just wander around aimlessly. Now before you say that I am claiming that humans do not want to be free and cannot think for themselves. Let me clarify by saying that in order for modern society to function properly, there must be some obedience to authority and laws. I also think that in society today human beings do not find it hard to disobey anything, it is just that there are not that many oppressing things. I also believe that if there were too many acts of disobedience, there would be a lot more instability and chaos in society not peace. They way we as humans like it. In conclusion, I think that Erich Fromm’s essay â€Å"Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem† was very intriguing and extremely controversial. I also think that it was a honest effort by the author to share his ideas with the public. I would suggested to Fromm to use facts not stories and myths to back up his claims. I think that Fromm was trying to say that disobedience is good while obedience without questioning is bad but this was just his view. I strongly believe that both acts has its own good and bad points.