For some reason I hasn't heard of this study done by Yale researcher Stanley Milgram until I came across a reference of it in another book. It was a controversial study at the time because of it's timing with the WW2 trials of Nazi members and the belief that other countries wouldn't "fall in line" when demanded by authority.

quote:
The subjects believed that for each wrong answer, the learner was receiving actual shocks. In reality, there were no shocks. After the learner was separated from the teacher, the learner set up a tape recorder integrated with the electroshock generator, which played prerecorded sounds for each shock level. As the voltage of the fake shocks increased, the learner began making audible protests, such as banging repeatedly on the wall that separated him from the teacher. When the highest voltages were reached, the learner fell silent.[1]

If at any time the teacher indicated a desire to halt the experiment, the experimenter was instructed to give specific verbal prods. The prods were, in this order:[1]

Please continue.
The experiment requires that you continue.
It is absolutely essential that you continue.
You have no other choice, you must go on.
If the subject still wished to stop after all four successive verbal prods, the experiment was halted. Otherwise, it was halted after the subject had given the maximum 450-volt shock three times in succession.[1]

The experimenter also had prods to use if the teacher made specific comments. If the teacher asked whether the learner might suffer permanent physical harm, the experimenter replied, "Although the shocks may be painful, there is no permanent tissue damage, so please go on." If the teacher said that the learner clearly wants to stop, the experimenter replied, "Whether the learner likes it or not, you must go on until he has learned all the word pairs correctly, so please go on."

From his book "The Perils of Obedience"...

quote:
Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.

LINK

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by OysterPoBoy

City of St. George

Member since Jul 2013

45511 posts

Posted on 12/3/18 at 12:14 pm to Golfer

I thought that was debunked.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by PrivatePublic

Member since Nov 2012

17848 posts

Posted on 12/3/18 at 12:17 pm to Golfer

Following authority and your own moral compass are not mutually exclusive, except perhaps for the weak minded.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Jim Rockford

Member since May 2011

106029 posts

Posted on 12/3/18 at 12:23 pm to OysterPoBoy

quote:
I thought that was debunked.

Yeah I thought so too.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by TheCaterpillar

Member since Jan 2004

76774 posts

Posted on 12/3/18 at 12:25 pm to Golfer

I'm sort of confused about what's happening here.

So there are 3 people:

- The teacher
- The learner
- The experimenter

Teacher is asking questions to the learner and thinks every time they get something wrong they are shocked and that the voltage increases each wrong answer.

The teacher requests to stop and the experimenter says several commands telling them to keep going.

Basically the experiment is to see whether people will just follow commands no matter what, even if it means harming another human? i.e. German soldiers torturing and killing Jews?

ETA:

I guess I'm wondering why the teachers in this scenario aren't asking more questions about the learner and their consent to participate in this study. First thing I'd do is make sure all parties are consenting, then if so, I'd have no problems shocking the frick out of the learner