4 ms·

The idea that you should do whatever you want regardless of the team or management you work with looks pretty dumb when you apply it to situations that actually

The idea that you should do whatever you want regardless of the team or management you work with looks pretty dumb when you apply it to situations that actually matter. I see that principle as putting the responsibility back into the shoulders of the person carrying the action. I see it as a way of ignoring the "just following orders excuse".[1][2] So no, I don't think it looks pretty dumb, I think it is as something to consider seriously. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment Edit: Added footnotes

Silhouette 12y ago
I see it as a way of ignoring the "just following orders excuse". You're going to Godwin the thread? Really? If you do want to make that argument, please consider firstly that the Nuremberg defence failed, in that particular context, because it was considered so obviously inappropriate for the defendants to act as they did just because they were ordered to do so that they should have known better and refused to comply. Secondly, please also consider that the Nuremberg verdicts stand in stark contrast to normal military discipline in basically every armed service in the world, where refusing to follow a lawful order from a superior officer is grounds for a court martial and potentially a severe punishment. In particular, the current situation recognised by the International Criminal Court and the 100+ signatory states to the Rome Statute lists only genocide and crimes against humanity as manifestly unlawful, potentially admitting the superior orders principle as a defence in other cases where the defendant believed they were complying with a lawful order. This is even noted in one of the links you gave yourself. In any case, I would hope we all agree that being instructed to implement a software safeguard against criminal production of counterfeit currency is not on the same scale as being instructed to execute millions of innocent people in gas chambers.

Silhouette 12y ago

I see it as a way of ignoring the "just following orders excuse". You're going to Godwin the thread? Really? If you do want to make that argument, please consider firstly that the Nuremberg defence failed, in that particular context, because it was considered so obviously inappropriate for the defendants to act as they did just because they were ordered to do so that they should have known better and refused to comply. Secondly, please also consider that the Nuremberg verdicts stand in stark contrast to normal military discipline in basically every armed service in the world, where refusing to follow a lawful order from a superior officer is grounds for a court martial and potentially a severe punishment. In particular, the current situation recognised by the International Criminal Court and the 100+ signatory states to the Rome Statute lists only genocide and crimes against humanity as manifestly unlawful, potentially admitting the superior orders principle as a defence in other cases where the defendant believed they were complying with a lawful order. This is even noted in one of the links you gave yourself. In any case, I would hope we all agree that being instructed to implement a software safeguard against criminal production of counterfeit currency is not on the same scale as being instructed to execute millions of innocent people in gas chambers.