Why some crave authority and some obedience

The paper ” Why Some Crave Authority and Some Obedience” is a wonderful example of an essay on English.
In the last two paragraphs where Milgram talks about “ a fragmentation of the total human act”, I believe he is referring to a problem of obedience that is not wholly philosophical. With effective social organization, obedience can yield evil since the structure of the society compels an individual to take orders. Such a structure eliminates the aspect of responsibility thus; the consequence of an evil action does not confront anyone. Through specialization in careers, for example, a security officer views aspects of society from a restricted angle. He takes orders from the authorities obediently and implements them without questioning such intricate features as the morality and consequences of such orders (Milgram and Philip 172).
The “ essence of obedience” according to Milgram I believe is the ability to infuse conscience in obedience. He encourages people to consider their actions and adopt a broader approach to circumstances thereby obey orders that contribute to the greater good of society. The conflict between conscience and obedience is a fundamental feature of the study. However, he proposes to form both the etiquette of submission and the need for a duty without conflict. As such, he encourages people to submit to authority but do so by reconciling their conscience with the orders. I believe Erich Fromm would agree with Milgram in his arguments. Fromm propagates for the relationship with people through care, knowledge, and respect. He postulates several other concepts such as rootedness and sense of identity all of which places an individual as a strategic member of the society. As such, an individual must always consider his actions and act with the view to upholding the greater good for the society.