Is it fair to deceive humans in an unethical psychological experiment in order to receive new information? This is a question that I believe needs to be asked when one thinks of the Milgram experiment‚ a psychological study set up in the U.S in 1965. American psychologist Stanley Milgram held an experiment in order to see how severely ordinary human beings could knowingly cause harm to another human. This idea came about when he studied the holocaust in Germany in WWII‚ and then in the Nuremberg
Premium Stanford prison experiment Psychology Milgram experiment
was passing down orders from higher authority. The frightening thing about the Milgram experiment is that it proves that Hoss’ makeup was not dissimilar from that of any ordinary person and if any ordinary person was put in the situation of Hoss to carry out the extermination of people‚ they would follow through with these orders just like how the 65% of people followed through with the electric shocks of the actor. Milgram also added factors like socialization through family‚ school‚ and military service
Premium Nazism Adolf Hitler Nazi Germany
that instant if it’d be for the greater cause of science and knowledge? In discussion of psychologist Stanley Milgram‚ a controversial issue has been whether or not Milgram’s experiment was based on the ethical conflict between obedience to authority versus personal conscience. On the one hand‚ some argue that it was ethical because it would explain Nazi behavior. From this perspective‚ Milgram believed that all it was just human aggression held deep within and when given the chance to let it out‚ people
Premium Stanford prison experiment Psychology Stanley Milgram
Milgram experiment tells us about human and obedience. Humans are socially adapted to the society they live in and obedience is when a group humans follows the rule no matter wrong or right. Humans are usually obedient in most situations. That is due to teachings they receive. For example‚ when Hitler was killing groups of people‚ it was wrong; but the group of authority just listen to him and followed the rules. This situation was wrong and harmful but it was something that they just followed because
Premium Morality Human Crime
Stanley Milgram Obedience Experiment One of the most famous studies of obedience in psychology was carried out by Stanley Milgram (1963). Stanley Milgram‚ a psychologist at Yale University‚ conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. He examined justifications for acts of genocide offered by those accused at the World War II‚ Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Their defense often was based on "obedience" - that they were just
Free Milgram experiment Stanford prison experiment Stanley Milgram
to stand against the majority opinion. Several famous studies have looked at different aspects of conformity and how subjects respond to certain situations. The results of the Milgram‚ Asch‚ and Zimbardo studies can teach us to avoid abuses of power in the future. The first study discussed was conducted by Stanley Milgram‚ and it looked at how far a participant would go in hurting another human when told to do so by the researcher in charge. Sometimes subjects gave what was supposed to be a potentially
Premium Milgram experiment Stanford prison experiment Psychology
Evaluate Milgrams research into obedience. Stanley Milgram (1963) explains why 65% of the people did something they felt was morally wrong‚ that is they went into an agentic state and exhibited some aspects of denial in order to avoid moral strain. However‚ Milgram does not explain why 65% did not obey. In other words‚ it does not explain individual differences as the volunteers in Milgrams experiment seemed to resist the pressure and Milgram does not explain that. To continue‚ the experiment
Premium Ethics Stanford prison experiment Milgram experiment
Good and bad: there always seems to be a choice and an extensive gap between them‚ as if there is no grey area whatsoever. In literature and film‚ this frequently leaves two distinct and defining characters within them: the “good guy”‚ the protagonist‚ and the “bad guy”‚ the antagonist. Contradictive of the prior point‚ is the reality of life and people’s ability to choose right over wrong. Given the choice‚ most tend to do wrong for the simplest reasoning of having the ability to do so‚ or the fact
Premium Of Mice and Men John Steinbeck Great Depression
got you to look after me‚ and you got me to look after you‚’ page 14 Of Mice and Men”. In the book‚ “Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck George constantly proves himself to be a good friend to Lennie by taking care of him throughout the book. George is a good friend to Lennie because he took him in after Lennie’s Aunt Clara passed‚ and when he kept Lennie’s work card for him. The first time George proves that he is a good friend is when he took Lennie in after his Aunt Clara died. On page 40 George says
Premium
mentally. Chapters 5-8 4. There is something ironic in the fact that Sophie is discovered in a "good" season. What is meant with "ironic"? What might have happened if the crops and newborn animals had been deviant? When Sophie and her six toes are discovered in a "good" season‚ it is ironic that she was the only deviation discovered in an otherwise deviation-free period. For if Sophie was discovered in a "good" season‚ she wouldn’t be discovered in a "bad" season. Furthermore‚ if the crops and newborn
Premium Telepathy David