Poll: You're in the Milgram Experiment!
- Thread starter Dimensional Vortex
- Start date
Recommended Videos
This. If there's anything that gets to me, it's electric shocks and desperate screaming. I also really hate asylums. Not that I've ever been to one in real life, but after years of gaming and movies I really don't want to.Cheesus333 said:
I can withstand a lot of things, but those three... no way.
To answer your questions (in reverse order):Vrach said:Exactly why would one keep going? Or even agree to such a study in the first place?Matt_LRR said:
Oh and someone's been watching CSI: Miami?
One would participate in this study as a blind participant, unaware of what you were going to be required to do or what the purpose of the study was. (this study would not meet ethics standards any more, by the by.)
One would keep going, because, well, that's what people do - they succumb to the pressure being placed on them by a figure of authority, and proceed to inflict pain and torture (or so they think) on a victim beyond the point of unconsciousness or death - and in 65% of cases, right up to the maximum amount of punishment they are able and required to inflict.
this is a super famous experiment that's been repeated many, many times. It was undertaken to explore the kinds of situations that led to the actions of Nazi soldiers in world war 2, and has actually granted a great deal of insight with regards to how willing soldiers, and people in subordinate positions are to push past their own rationality to follow the orders of a superior.
The results of the experiment should be shocking and scary - because they reveal a very dark thing about human nature. The conditions that led to the horrotrs commited by the nazis are not that difficult to replicate, even among every day people.
-m
Well, now that you've read it to me, I would stop. But most likely, I would have continued. It hurts to say it, but yes.
Oh! I loved reading about this experiment in Psychology 101! You know why? Because exactly what the second post in this thread said. Most people will say that they'd stop, but when you actually enter the situation, you might not. Submission to authority was the point of the experiment. If the authority is there, you're more likely to listen to what they tell you.
Honestly, though, I don't know what I'd do if I was actually in it.
Honestly, though, I don't know what I'd do if I was actually in it.
Aye, I understand how the experiment works, I'm sorta familiar with it (although less so than you obviously), but personally I don't see myself doing it. If I had a gun to my head? Yeah, I'd likely keep pressing the button (although even then it's a stretch). Just because it's an authority? I don't really see that happening at all.Matt_LRR said:To answer your questions (in reverse order):Vrach said:Exactly why would one keep going? Or even agree to such a study in the first place?Matt_LRR said:
Oh and someone's been watching CSI: Miami?
One would participate in this study as a blind participant, unaware of what you were going to be required to do or what the purpose of the study was. (this study would not meet ethics standards any more, by the by.)
One would keep going, because, well, that's what people do - they succumb to the pressure being placed on them by a figure of authority, and proceed to inflict pain and torture (or so they think) on a victim beyond the point of unconsciousness or death - and in 65% of cases, right up to the maximum amount of punishment they are able and required to inflict.
this is a super famous experiment that's been repeated many, many times. It was undertaken to explore the kinds of situations that led to the actions of Nazi soldiers in world war 2, and has actually granted a great deal of insight with regards to how willing soldiers, and people in subordinate positions are to push past their own rationality to follow the orders of a superior.
The results of the experiment should be shocking and scary - because they reveal a very dark thing about human nature. The conditions that led to the horrotrs commited by the nazis are not that difficult to replicate, even among every day people.
-m
Incidentally, how is a random psychologist who doesn't threaten you in any way, merely telling you you're not responsible for your actions viewed as an authority figure? Maybe that's the issue, I'm just against assumed authority :\
1st question: people keep going because the perceived authority figure tells them to (and no, you're not the unique rebel who would never do such a thing. 65% went to full strength and most of the rest went a ways up the shock scale).Vrach said:Exactly why would one keep going? Or even agree to such a study in the first place?Matt_LRR said:
Oh and someone's been watching CSI: Miami?
2nd question: because you're a psych student who got asked to by a professor. Maybe they're paying you $100 for your participation. Whatever the reason you agreed to participate, you did not know the nature of the experiment until you got there (most likely).
People like to think they'll refuse a questionable order, but in reality we're very good at rationalizing our actions. In this experiment I'm sure people told themselves they weren't responsible, the man in the labcoat was, and so they kept going. Also, people inherently trust authorities to some degree, so I'm sure there were a lot of, "This guy knows what he's doing. I'm surely not going to cause that man serious harm."
I'd like to think that I would stop, but I'm unsure whether my morals or my desire for scientific progression. It's something that I'd have to decide at the time.
I know about the Milgram Experiment so I would stop from experience.
The whole point of it was that no one knew, and you can't know for it to work.
If I had been in the original experiment I don't know if I would have continued. Given my reactions to authority figures in the past I'd say the presence of an authority figure I didn't know wouldn't dissuade me. (An authority figure I did know might convince me though) and I don't really have the stomach for human suffering, especially physical human suffering, so I like to think I'd stop out of disgust and fear at my actions, and not restart because I was told to.
Of course, I can't know for sure.
The whole point of it was that no one knew, and you can't know for it to work.
If I had been in the original experiment I don't know if I would have continued. Given my reactions to authority figures in the past I'd say the presence of an authority figure I didn't know wouldn't dissuade me. (An authority figure I did know might convince me though) and I don't really have the stomach for human suffering, especially physical human suffering, so I like to think I'd stop out of disgust and fear at my actions, and not restart because I was told to.
Of course, I can't know for sure.
I totally wouldn't stop. Nothing motivates me more than a guy with a clipboard and a lab coat telling what to do.
I think there was a study done about this phenomenon(the difference in what people say and what they do). Although the difference isn't as big as I would have thought. Then again, there is the middle ground option which skews the results way too much.Matt_LRR said:
Not really. We are social creatures which means we naturally honor until a hierarchy and yield to people with authority.Atmos Duality said:
It's to do with the way the experiment is constructed.Vrach said:
You're taken into the experiment blind.
You don't know what you're going to be asked to do, or what is being studied.
You're being give a payment to participate in the study.
The Scientist is presented to you as knowing whats going on.
You're told to follow the scientists orders.
You are told that the scientist is in control.
You are told that all you have to do is go along with what he says.
You are told that you are not responsible for the consequenses of your actions.
You are told that you have to complete the experiment or the whole study will be ruined.
You are put in a nondescript and closed room, isolated from others (except for the scientist).
You've now been given pressure to complete by natre of:
-a percieved lack of understanding
-a percieved authority figure
-a percieved contractual obligation
-a lack of social support
-a percived danger of damaging the study
and so on.
The situation is key. It's not hard to construct intense situational pressure to complete.
And most people do.
-m
Well that's not really fair. Certainly they'll be lying, but they might not be wrong. Anything said about a hypothetical situation when removed from said situation is a lie as there's no way to prove what would happen except to go through the situation, and even then that's only for that particular occurrence. They could say they'll do X and indeed end up doing X, which when proclaimed would be a lie but still end up being what happened, so they'll have lied but also been right.Matt_LRR said:
Fair enough. But I doubt I'd rationalise that way after seeing the man in pain. I charged a pack of 4 wild dogs for ripping a random street cat apart, causing (especially prolonged) harm to a human being is not something I'd be easily coaxed into doing. Not to mention my awareness of the amount of electricity that is easily able to stop a heart - which is why I would tell the man inviting me to conduct a study that involves an exponentially growing amount of electricity being run through a human being to shove a rusty steel pipe up his arse before we'd even get startedNigh Invulnerable said:1st question: people keep going because the perceived authority figure tells them to (and no, you're not the unique rebel who would never do such a thing. 65% went to full strength and most of the rest went a ways up the shock scale).Vrach said:Exactly why would one keep going? Or even agree to such a study in the first place?Matt_LRR said:
Oh and someone's been watching CSI: Miami?
2nd question: because you're a psych student who got asked to by a professor. Maybe they're paying you $100 for your participation. Whatever the reason you agreed to participate, you did not know the nature of the experiment until you got there (most likely).
People like to think they'll refuse a questionable order, but in reality we're very good at rationalizing our actions. In this experiment I'm sure people told themselves they weren't responsible, the man in the labcoat was, and so they kept going. Also, people inherently trust authorities to some degree, so I'm sure there were a lot of, "This guy knows what he's doing. I'm surely not going to cause that man serious harm."
edit: Oh, for Matt:
- Causing harm, pain and a potentially lethal amount damage to a human being is all that I can understand in the situation where I'm given no other informationMatt_LRR said:
- I don't accept the authority of a figure until I have a reason to
- I have the option of going on or stopping. Someone else's study that I know nothing about is less important to me than pain, damage and potential death of another human being
- I don't need social support to know inflicting pain and possible death is wrong
- See point about contractual obligation
You know, you're really invalidating the purpose of this experiment by showing it to us like this, since it takes out all of the elements that actually make it work. None of us here are fair judges of ourselves or what we would do. We aren't unbiased observers of ourselves.
From past experiences, though, I think I would leave before I was even told to shock him the first time, because I honestly can't stand the thought of causing pain to someone. I would be too uncomfortable with the idea even the first time, because I'd be too afraid of something going wrong. Shocking a guy even once would feel totally unsafe to me, and I don't respect the authority of these so-called superiors, so there's no reason for me to follow their orders. I'll freely admit that I distrust authority, so their assurances mean nothing to me, because I would believe that they don't give a fuck about the wellbeing of the test subject (even though I know that's an irrational response since they obviously aren't hurting the guy in the experiment).
So, yeah, I would react totally irrationally and walk out on the experiment, possibly causing an embarrassingly big scene before I realized it was fake, and then felt stupid.
From past experiences, though, I think I would leave before I was even told to shock him the first time, because I honestly can't stand the thought of causing pain to someone. I would be too uncomfortable with the idea even the first time, because I'd be too afraid of something going wrong. Shocking a guy even once would feel totally unsafe to me, and I don't respect the authority of these so-called superiors, so there's no reason for me to follow their orders. I'll freely admit that I distrust authority, so their assurances mean nothing to me, because I would believe that they don't give a fuck about the wellbeing of the test subject (even though I know that's an irrational response since they obviously aren't hurting the guy in the experiment).
So, yeah, I would react totally irrationally and walk out on the experiment, possibly causing an embarrassingly big scene before I realized it was fake, and then felt stupid.
I am pretty sure I would stop when I heard the first scream of terror. Then again, I'd never know unless given the test.
JUST LIKE DESSERT BUSS!!.....we knew you were all in massive amounts of pain...but they just kept giving you more timeMatt_LRR said:
NA I would continue to shock the guy. I truthfully have tryed to hurt people worse and i saw there face..........P.S for last dessert Bus i was broke and had no job. This year i will donate what i can...just...not 2k and be like them other guys...thats just crazy...but good crazy. it helps sick children