The Instigator
mobin
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
rnsweetheart
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

visiting forces agreement should be abolioshed

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/12/2008 Category: News
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,042 times Debate No: 3197
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

mobin

Con

vsisitng forces agreement entered into between the RP and ther USA is becoming abusive.... it has been my personal concern since ive seen my pinoy people suffering from the cruelty of these americans. an eye opener scenario is the subic rape scandal. is it not a learning point that we are abused by these white men?
rnsweetheart

Pro

It is human nature to be obedient. They are not at fault it is human behavior.
Obedience, or submissive compliance, is the act of obeying orders from others. This differs from compliance, which is behavior influenced by peers. This is in turn different from conformity, which is behavior intended to match that of the majority.

Some animals can easily be trained to be obedient by employing operant conditioning, which places the human being in the role of a dominant animal. Obedience schools exist to condition dogs into obeying the orders of human owners.

Obedience training seems to be particularly effective on social animals,[citation needed] a category which includes human beings. Other animals do not respond well to such training.

Humans have been shown to be surprisingly obedient in the presence of perceived legitimate authority figures, as demonstrated by the Milgram experiment in the 1960s. Stanley Milgram carried out his experiments to discover how the Nazis had managed to get ordinary people to take part in the mass murder of the Holocaust. The experiment showed that compliance with authority was the norm, not the exception. A similar effect was found in the Stanford prison experiment.

Contents [hide]
1 Forms of human obedience
2 Cultural attitudes to obedience
3 Obedience training of human beings
4 Experimental studies of human obedience
4.1 The Milgram experiment
4.2 The Stanford prison experiment
5 Factors affecting obedience
5.1 Embodiment of prestige or power
6 Notes and references
7 See also
8 External links

[edit] Forms of human obedience
Forms of human obedience include:

obedience to laws
obedience to social norms
obedience to a monarch, government, organization, religion, or church
obedience to a God
obedience to self-imposed constraints, such as a vow of chastity
obedience of a spouse or child to a husband/wife or parent
obedience of a vassal to his lord (in feudal societies)
obedience to a dominant (see BDSM)

[edit] Cultural attitudes to obedience
Obedience is regarded as a moral virtue in many traditional cultures; historically, children have been expected to be obedient to their elders,slaves to their owners, serfs to their lords, lords to their king, and everyone to God. Even long after slavery in the United States ended, the Black Codes required Black people to obey and submit to Whites, on pain of lynching.[citation needed]

In some Christian weddings, obedience was formally included along with honor and love as part of a conventional bride's (but not the bridegroom's) wedding vow. This came under attack with women's suffrage and the feminist movement. Today its inclusion in the wedding vow practiced by some Christian sects has fallen out of favor.[citation needed]

As the middle classes have gained political power, the power of authority has been progressively eroded, with the introduction of democracy as a major turning point in attitudes to obedience and authority.[citation needed]

Since the democides and genocides of the First World War and Second World War periods, obedience has come to be regarded as a far less desirable quality in Western cultures. The civil rights and protest movements of the post-War period marked a remarkable reduction in respect for authority in Western cultures, and greater respect for individual ethical judgment as a basis for moral decisions.[citation needed]

[edit] Obedience training of human beings
Main article: Socialization
Learning obedience to adult rules is a major part of the socialization process in childhood, and many techniques are used by adults to modify the behavior of children.

Main article: Military training
Extensive training is given in armies to make soldiers capable of obeying orders in situations where an untrained person would not be willing to follow orders. Soldiers are initially ordered to do seemingly trivial things, such as picking up the sergeant's hat off the floor, marching in just the right position, or marching and standing in formation. The orders gradually become more demanding, until an order to the soldiers to place themselves into the midst of gunfire gets a knee-jerk obedient response.

[edit] Experimental studies of human obedience
Obedience has been extensively studied by psychologists since the Second World War -- the Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment are the earliest and most commonly cited experimental studies of human obedience. [1] [2]

The first and best known obedience experiments were the Milgram experiment and the Stanford prison experiment, which were used to understand the roles participants would play in different social interactions, and also to understand the influence a dominant persona, or authority figure and to "fill the gap" within a largely spacious body of psychological research. [1][2]

[edit] The Milgram experiment
Main article: Milgram experiment
The Milgram experiment, first carried out in 1961, was one of the first experiments used to look into the power of authority figures as well as the lengths which participants would go as a result of their influence. [1] Milgram's results showed that, contrary to expectations, a majority of civilian volunteers would obey orders to (apparently) apply electric shocks to another person until they were (apparently) unconscious or dead. Prior to the experiment, most of Milgram's colleagues had predicted that only sadists would be willing to follow the experiment to its conclusion. [3]

In studies which predated the Milgram experiment, very little emphasis was put upon the participants' responses to authority and was more focused upon general fields of human behavior. Despite the fact that there was relatively little work which had been done directly in terms of obedience, there had already been several previous pieces of work done by Milgram himself, which had already shown trends of obedience increase due to the prestige of the authority figure -- in their case, an undergraduate research assistant posing as a Yale professor whom had a much greater influence someone of lesser status, regardless of prestige of the institution in which the study was based. [1][2]

The Milgram experiment was one of the first experiments used to study the power of authority figures and the extent to which we obey these figures within social situations. [1] Despite the fact that the study showed revealing information, the study was thought to be in breach of newly formed ethics, in which the rule of abdication was removed. [4]

[edit] The Stanford prison experiment
Main article: Stanford prison experiment
Unlike the Milgram experiment, which studied the obedience of individuals, the 1971 Stanford prison experiment studied the behavior of people in groups, and in particular the willingness of people to obey orders and adopt abusive roles in a situation where they were placed in the position of being submissive or dominant by a higher authority. In the experiment, a group of volunteers was divided into two groups and placed in a "prison", with one group in the position of playing prison guards, and other group in the position of "prisoners".

In this case, the experimenters acted as authority figures at the start of the experiment, but then delegated responsibility to the "guards", who enthusiastically followed the experimenters' instructions, and in turn assumed the roles of abusive authority figures, eventually going far beyond the experimenters' original instruction in their efforts to dominate and brutalize the "prisoners". At the same time, the prisoners adopted a submissive role with regard to their tormentors, in spite of the knowledge that they were in an experiment, and that their "captors" were other volunteers, with no other authority other than that being role-played in the experiment. The Stanford experiment demonstrated not only obedience (of the "guards" to the experimenters, and
Debate Round No. 1
mobin

Con

mobin forfeited this round.
rnsweetheart

Pro

rnsweetheart forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
mobin

Con

mobin forfeited this round.
rnsweetheart

Pro

rnsweetheart forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by psynthesizer 9 years ago
psynthesizer
Pro just copied directly from wikipedia. wtf?

no editing even. that's...bold?
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Rnsweetheart, you don't seem to have addressed the topic. At all. :D
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Although you seem to be racist and I am disturbed by that, I happen to agree mobin, though primarily due to there being no good reason to entangle the US in something like the VFA that I can see.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by DrAlexander 9 years ago
DrAlexander
mobinrnsweetheartTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Crust89 9 years ago
Crust89
mobinrnsweetheartTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Cooperman88 9 years ago
Cooperman88
mobinrnsweetheartTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30