Posted: 11/3/2009 8:19:19 PM EDT
|
This could be dupe, I don't know....nothing surprises me anymore of what's been discussed here on ARFCOM. In a social psychology class I'm taking we are learning about how individuals respond to authority. A scientist by the name of Milgram conducted a study in order to comprehend how German's so blindly followed Hitler's orders to execute Jews. Milgram's parents were survivors of the Holocaust. Take a look at this YouTube video where Milgram's experiment was replicated. It’s pretty shocking ( as well as funny). Milgram's experiment |
|
Quoted:
My thoughts on the test is that people might just have no idea what a lethal voltage is. I have a cheap stun gun that says 100,000 volts on it and it will burn you after a few seconds.  AC DC is not just a rock band.  
I had heard of this experiment; actually seeing it... Puts certain things into perspective. |
|
Quoted: Current is what gets you.My thoughts on the test is that people might just have no idea what a lethal voltage is. I have a cheap stun gun that says 100,000 volts on it and it will burn you after a few seconds. Voltage is meaningless, in the sense of "what will kill you". |
|
Quoted:
My thoughts on the test is that people might just have no idea what a lethal voltage is. I have a cheap stun gun that says 100,000 volts on it and it will burn you after a few seconds. It does not matter. They are going up the scale to leathal even after the subject no longer responds. The guy in the white coat is doing nothing more than saying continue. No overt force, no standing over the person and yelling commands. |
|
i'm amused to see all the chest-beaters sniggering at sheeple, when the posters weren't part of the double-blind experiment.
one of the most significant findings of milgram's and zimbardo's classic experiments was that so many fundamentally moral people were shocked at how they had reacted. it's incredibly easy to say "i wouldn't have done that" when you know what the puropse of the experiment is––a lot like armchair generals who have the benefit of hindsight. those of you thinking that this is an easy call should really sit down and look at the study. not an article about the study, but the study itself. i've already seen several inaccuracies posted. i would like to believe that i would have stopped the experiment, but i can't say for sure, because i wasn't fucking there. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
To me this one is more telling. http://www.prisonexp.org/ That's a great one. We went over these, and other experiments, in detail in a couple of my college classes. Everyone wants to think that they would do differently.... but in reality.... I think the other studies are very telling, but they did not have the direct contact feel to me. It's a different ballgame (to me) if you have brief encounter and not looking at the person you are dealing with. |
|
Quoted:
i'm amused to see all the chest-beaters sniggering at sheeple, when the posters weren't part of the double-blind experiment. one of the most significant findings of milgram's and zimbardo's classic experiments was that so many fundamentally moral people were shocked at how they had reacted. it's incredibly easy to say "i wouldn't have done that" when you know what the puropse of the experiment is––a lot like armchair generals who have the benefit of hindsight. those of you thinking that this is an easy call should really sit down and look at the study. not an article about the study, but the study itself. i've already seen several inaccuracies posted. i would like to believe that i would have stopped the experiment, but i can't say for sure, because i wasn't fucking there. You are looking at it from a reality point. Others can't. The studies are a great example of why certain atrocities can take place within a situation. I don't doubt it all. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To me this one is more telling. http://www.prisonexp.org/ That's a great one. We went over these, and other experiments, in detail in a couple of my college classes. Everyone wants to think that they would do differently.... but in reality.... I think the other studies are very telling, but they did not have the direct contact feel to me. It's a different ballgame (to me) if you have brief encounter and not looking at the person you are dealing with. Also a little different with a "harmless but painful" shock rather than a bullet to the head. Also much different than pulling piles of bodies out of gas chambers. |
|
No surprise at all, it is pretty much exactly as you should expect. If you did not, You better now.
The thing that surprises me is that they hesitated. If they had demonized the subject (learner) first you would have seen them (teachers) eagerly shock them. All that is required for most people to contribute to the next great human atrocity is for someone to lead the way. Anyone remember the crank call to the fast food joint, the caller get them to perform sexual acts in one case and got the women to piss on each other in another.. Over the phone! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To me this one is more telling. http://www.prisonexp.org/ That's a great one. We went over these, and other experiments, in detail in a couple of my college classes. Everyone wants to think that they would do differently.... but in reality.... I think the other studies are very telling, but they did not have the direct contact feel to me. It's a different ballgame (to me) if you have brief encounter and not looking at the person you are dealing with. Also a little different with a "harmless but painful" shock rather than a bullet to the head. Also much different than pulling piles of bodies out of gas chambers. Actually.... not as much as you would think. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
To me this one is more telling. http://www.prisonexp.org/ That's a great one. We went over these, and other experiments, in detail in a couple of my college classes. Everyone wants to think that they would do differently.... but in reality.... I personally know only *one* person who for certain would do the right thing. Those types of people make up a very small percentage of the population. 
|
|
I will be one of the first ones to say give the child molestor a 230 gr brain fart out behind the courthouse. It will get a lot of +1's etc.
Could you actually walk up to a person and shoot them in the back of the head? Would you do it if you knew the story? Would you do it if you read their story? Told their story? Shown pictures of what they did? Have a person of authority, cock the weapon, put it in your hand hand and say fire? |
|
Quoted:
i'm amused to see all the chest-beaters sniggering at sheeple, when the posters weren't part of the double-blind experiment. one of the most significant findings of milgram's and zimbardo's classic experiments was that so many fundamentally moral people were shocked at how they had reacted. it's incredibly easy to say "i wouldn't have done that" when you know what the puropse of the experiment is––a lot like armchair generals who have the benefit of hindsight. those of you thinking that this is an easy call should really sit down and look at the study. not an article about the study, but the study itself. i've already seen several inaccuracies posted. i would like to believe that i would have stopped the experiment, but i can't say for sure, because i wasn't fucking there. You make an excellent point. I'm not sure how many caught on but the guy that was caught shoplifting (which is a devient/non comforist behavior) was actually the quickest to stop the experiement. The black woman who seemed the most caring when as far as the machine would allow, even after the 'subject' stopped responding and asks for more buttons (referring to higher voltage). IIRC in the original experiment Milgram allows the 'teacher' to view the subject. |