Guest guest Posted May 28, 2001 Report Share Posted May 28, 2001 > > > > > > > >Hello, > > > > > > > >> > > > >> Second, you totally misread Milgrim and Zimbardo, and many > > other > > > > > > I presume you mean Milgram as in > > <http://www.stanleymilgram.com/>. > > > > > > >similar > > > >> studies. These studies accept that people come to an > > experimental > > > >situation > > > >> with already set personalities. SOME personality types - and > > they > > > >often > > > >> SEEM perfectly nice and normal - turn out to have a lot of > > willing > > > >sadism > > > >> built in to them. > > > > > > > >Just another 2 cents from me: > > > > > > > >When I saw the videos of these experiements, > > > > > > When was this? I saw a longish (1 hour or 2 hour) TV program (a > > special > > > documentary, as I recall, though it may have been whatever video you > > saw) > > > in the summer or fall of 1976. I suppose this could have been one of > > > Milgram's films as discussed on the website I give above. > > > > I can't remember for sure, but I think it was in 8th grade. I > > graduated GS in 1977, so it may have been then. It was a thing where > > they put the movie on the projector, dimmed the classroom lights and > > showed the " movie. " They showed both the Milgrim and the Zimbardo > > experiments (though I didn't remember the names of them). We also > > read a book (fiction) about a school that began to isolate students > > with red hair, I believe it was, but that part is *really* fuzzy. > > This was a public grade school and I can't help wondering if it is > > common practice to show these experiments?! Probably a good idea, the > > more I think about it > > > > > > >it did not seem to be a > > > >case of setting it up to detect sadism. > > > > > > Certainly not - I see it as testing whether following an > > authority's > > > orders would win out over refusal to do something they did NOT want > > to > > > do, and for felt was wrong to do. > > > > > > >Milgrim was trying to > > > >determine the extent to which people would bow to authority. IMO, > > > > > > I got Milgram's book " Obedience to Authority " a couple of years > > ago, > > > but still haven't read it. It's available new and used through all > > the > > > usual sources (such as <http://www.bookfinder.com>). Here are the > > quite > > > interesting reviews on amazon.com: > > > > Thanks, I will look at those. > > > > > > > > <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/006131983X/o/qid=991009870/sr= > > 2-1/re > > > f=aps_sr_b_1_1/107-0848120-9206122> > > > > > > >some of the people who gave the biggest shocks were not sadists. > > > > > > I'll have to read the book, but I don't recall anything about > > > sadists one way or the other (and one would have to give a separate > > > test to determine who were sadists) - these were all 'average, > > normal' > > > people. > > > > Yes. 's point was that although they were " average, normal, " that > > under the right circumstances it was " revealed " to them that they were > > " sadists " because some of them did shock the subjects to near-fatal > > levels. I disagree, but I can see that before I say one more word > > about it I would have to look at the source material again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 28, 2001 Report Share Posted May 28, 2001 Also, you did not answer my objection about a control group or the trust issue. > Not all people are lions. Some are burros. Some are even other types. > We respond differently in different environments. But it is WE who act, and > not the environment that makes us act the way we do. If you are a burro, > the environment cannot make you into a lion without your cooperation. This logic is faulty, and releases the authority figure, another human, and the experimenter, another human, from all responsibility. My best guess is that I was 13 when I saw this experiment. I *know* I would not have been able to overcome the orders of the authority figure and walk away at that point in my life. Some lion. Today, I haven't the slightest doubt that I would--in that situation, because I'm hip to it, but probably others as well. And yet another question: did they ever determine that there was anything in common within the groups? Or did they just prove that people responded differently in a very stressful situation? PS: For a " humanist " you seem to be pretty fond of classifying people as animals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2001 Report Share Posted May 29, 2001 - read a good account of My Lai. Some DID give it a second thought, even risked their own lives to stop it. Others did NOT give it a second thought. People ARE different. And it is thoughful social values that make them different. I am not trying to insult you. I AM trying to get you to think about your social values, and about how much you are willing to trust authority. Less trust, and more questioning, might not be a bad thing. You have learned to question AA, and the DOCTORS who advise it. I am trying to get you to expand that level of questioning. Re: lions & burros > > > > > > > > > > >Hello, > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> Second, you totally misread Milgrim and Zimbardo, and many > > > other > > > > > > > > I presume you mean Milgram as in > > > <http://www.stanleymilgram.com/>. > > > > > > > > >similar > > > > >> studies. These studies accept that people come to an > > > experimental > > > > >situation > > > > >> with already set personalities. SOME personality types - and > > > they > > > > >often > > > > >> SEEM perfectly nice and normal - turn out to have a lot of > > > willing > > > > >sadism > > > > >> built in to them. > > > > > > > > > >Just another 2 cents from me: > > > > > > > > > >When I saw the videos of these experiements, > > > > > > > > When was this? I saw a longish (1 hour or 2 hour) TV program > (a > > > special > > > > documentary, as I recall, though it may have been whatever video > you > > > saw) > > > > in the summer or fall of 1976. I suppose this could have been > one of > > > > Milgram's films as discussed on the website I give above. > > > > > > I can't remember for sure, but I think it was in 8th grade. I > > > graduated GS in 1977, so it may have been then. It was a thing > where > > > they put the movie on the projector, dimmed the classroom lights > and > > > showed the " movie. " They showed both the Milgrim and the Zimbardo > > > experiments (though I didn't remember the names of them). We also > > > read a book (fiction) about a school that began to isolate > students > > > with red hair, I believe it was, but that part is *really* fuzzy. > > > This was a public grade school and I can't help wondering if it is > > > common practice to show these experiments?! Probably a good idea, > the > > > more I think about it > > > > > > > > >it did not seem to be a > > > > >case of setting it up to detect sadism. > > > > > > > > Certainly not - I see it as testing whether following an > > > authority's > > > > orders would win out over refusal to do something they did NOT > want > > > to > > > > do, and for felt was wrong to do. > > > > > > > > >Milgrim was trying to > > > > >determine the extent to which people would bow to authority. > IMO, > > > > > > > > I got Milgram's book " Obedience to Authority " a couple of > years > > > ago, > > > > but still haven't read it. It's available new and used through > all > > > the > > > > usual sources (such as <http://www.bookfinder.com>). Here are > the > > > quite > > > > interesting reviews on amazon.com: > > > > > > Thanks, I will look at those. > > > > > > > > > > > > <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/006131983X/o/qid=991009870/sr= > > > 2-1/re > > > > f=aps_sr_b_1_1/107-0848120-9206122> > > > > > > > > >some of the people who gave the biggest shocks were not > sadists. > > > > > > > > I'll have to read the book, but I don't recall anything about > > > > sadists one way or the other (and one would have to give a > separate > > > > test to determine who were sadists) - these were all 'average, > > > normal' > > > > people. > > > > > > Yes. 's point was that although they were " average, normal, " > that > > > under the right circumstances it was " revealed " to them that they > were > > > " sadists " because some of them did shock the subjects to > near-fatal > > > levels. I disagree, but I can see that before I say one more word > > > about it I would have to look at the source material again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2001 Report Share Posted May 29, 2001 You have learned to question AA, and the DOCTORS who advise it. I am trying to get you to expand that level of questioning. My father is an arch-conservative who believes Pope II is liberal, and that Pat Buchanan is "almost" conservative enough. He raised me to constantly question, and particularly emphasized that just because something is in print does not make it so. Of course, applying those lessons I have ended up an atheist/agnostic who would sooner abolish the entire government than see Pat Buchanan serve as a municipal dog catcher. Daddy is only just barely grateful that I ended up a libertarian rather than a <shudder> liberal. seems already disposed to question. But even is she were not, your tutelage would not necessarily lead her to where you think she should be. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2001 Report Share Posted May 29, 2001 I'm wondering if there is anything that can learn from the people here, or if he sees his role as spreading his knowledge one way only. is truly very learned and well-read. Time contraints prevent me from keeping up with all of the threads in which he is posting, even tho Goldhagen's book and his thesis is of immense interest to me. I just don't have the time for all that intrigues me. That said, I do get the impression that sees himself as a missionary to the Insufficiently Enlightened. Missionaries of any stripe are annoying. --Mona-- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2001 Report Share Posted May 30, 2001 Hi Mona, > > seems already disposed to question. But even is she were not, your > tutelage would not necessarily lead her to where you think she should be. Very succinctly put. I'm wondering if there is anything that can learn from the people here, or if he sees his role as spreading his knowledge one way only. Disagreement with his views certainly earns harsh and sarcastic language. I am still thinking about the Milgram experiment, and I did check out his book from the library today. This issue really does have me curious. Are 's ideas really what Milgram concluded? Are there any other conclusions to be drawn from it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2001 Report Share Posted May 30, 2001 Even those commissioned by the Pharmaceutical Industries. >From: MonaHolland@... >Reply-To: 12-step-free >To: 12-step-free >Subject: Re: Re: lions & burros >Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:19:51 EDT > >In a message dated 5/29/01 11:02:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >ahicks@... writes: > > > > I'm wondering if there is anything that can learn from the people > > here, or if he sees his role as spreading his knowledge one way only. > > > > is truly very learned and well-read. Time contraints prevent me from >keeping up with all of the threads in which he is posting, even tho >Goldhagen's book and his thesis is of immense interest to me. I just don't >have the time for all that intrigues me. > >That said, I do get the impression that sees himself as a missionary >to >the Insufficiently Enlightened. Missionaries of any stripe are annoying. > >--Mona-- _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2001 Report Share Posted May 30, 2001 > I am still thinking about the Milgram experiment, and I did check out > his book from the library today. This issue really does have me > curious. Are 's ideas really what Milgram concluded? Are there > any other conclusions to be drawn from it? Milgram did not consider that ppl became sadists in the experiment - rather that they overcame their inhibition against cruelty when ordered to. Some subjects laughed *hysterically*, not sadistically, and many showed considerable distress. I doubt that I would have had the resolve of Milgram to keep urging the subjects to continue, and even Milgram put a stop to the experiment with 3 subjects, who appeared to be close to siezures. P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2001 Report Share Posted May 30, 2001 Hi Pete Milgram did not consider that ppl became sadists in the experiment - rather that they overcame their inhibition against cruelty when ordered to. Some subjects laughed *hysterically*, not sadistically, and many showed considerable distress. I doubt that I would have had the resolve of Milgram to keep urging the subjects to continue, and even Milgram put a stop to the experiment with 3 subjects, who appeared to be close to siezures. Does this mean that when you say I'm hysterical I'm not sadistic? I'm really happy for this as I was considering ectomy to become a better person. But my female doctor said NO! Well, anyway. I don't remember how many cows you've burned in England lately, but I think it surpassed one million. Did it smell? Do you think peasants could tell the difference between this smell and the smell of burned, let's say hay? Do you think Germans could not smell the difference in W.W.II.? Bjørn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2001 Report Share Posted May 30, 2001 > > Does this mean that when you say I'm hysterical I'm not sadistic? No - however, it does mean that because someone laughs when thinking they are applying electric shocks to someone, one cannot conclude that they are enjoying the experience. > > I'm really happy for this as I was considering ectomy to become a >better person. But my female doctor said NO! > > Well, anyway. I don't remember how many cows you've burned in >England lately, but I think it surpassed one million. > > Did it smell? Do you think peasants could tell the difference between this smell and the smell of burned, let's say hay? > > Do you think Germans could not smell the difference in W.W.II.? I am saddened Bjorn that you should indulge in this silly rhetoric, which like 's abuse, ought perehaps not be dignified by a reply. In London I havent had so much as a whiff of a burning cow and the death camps were hardly within smelling distance of German towns (many were outside Germany of course). Although fwiw, apparently the burning corpses smelled like roast chicken, but this would only apply to those burnt in open pyres - those burnt in incinerators would produce smoke and ash that could be anything. Incidentally Bjorn, do you believe that the Nazis made soap from human fat? Many ppl do, including at least one holocaust survivor (who said that the burning corpses smelled like chicken). In fact this is a myth. No evidence for it has ever been found. If a German heard that story during the war, they would have been right to disbelieve it. Now, is what the Nazis actually did any less amazingly revolting? Hence, wouldnt it have been reasonable for ppl to discount rumours of what actually did happen on the (albeit mistaken) basis that such things could never happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2001 Report Share Posted May 30, 2001 > I'm obviously privileged to get one. I can't stop praising your >holyness. Never thought an isolated islander could make me feel like >this. Childish sarcasm like the above is why I may not reply to you in future Bjorn. > I've smelled burned flesh, and it sure don't smell like chickens in >Denmark. But I've been in England and tasted the English art of >cooking, so I don't wonder you can't tell the difference. The above might be playful teasing, but under the circumstances, are such witticisms really helpful? In his account of debating with Holocaust deniers on the " Donahue " show, Shermer reports that a death camp survivor says that she could never bear the smell of roast chicken after smelling burning corpses. She was also the one that Shermer had to correct when she thought that soap had been made from human fat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2001 Report Share Posted May 30, 2001 Lt Callais was court s-martialed in a big media event, and found guilty of some kind of criminal homicide charge, was given a lengthy sentence, and was pardoned or paroled or something after less than two years in the stockade. Mike. Re: lions & burros > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Second, you totally misread Milgrim and Zimbardo, and many > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > I presume you mean Milgram as in > > > > <http://www.stanleymilgram.com/>. > > > > > > > > > > >similar > > > > > >> studies. These studies accept that people come to an > > > > experimental > > > > > >situation > > > > > >> with already set personalities. SOME personality types - and > > > > they > > > > > >often > > > > > >> SEEM perfectly nice and normal - turn out to have a lot of > > > > willing > > > > > >sadism > > > > > >> built in to them. > > > > > > > > > > > >Just another 2 cents from me: > > > > > > > > > > > >When I saw the videos of these experiements, > > > > > > > > > > When was this? I saw a longish (1 hour or 2 hour) TV program > > (a > > > > special > > > > > documentary, as I recall, though it may have been whatever video > > you > > > > saw) > > > > > in the summer or fall of 1976. I suppose this could have been > > one of > > > > > Milgram's films as discussed on the website I give above. > > > > > > > > I can't remember for sure, but I think it was in 8th grade. I > > > > graduated GS in 1977, so it may have been then. It was a thing > > where > > > > they put the movie on the projector, dimmed the classroom lights > > and > > > > showed the " movie. " They showed both the Milgrim and the Zimbardo > > > > experiments (though I didn't remember the names of them). We also > > > > read a book (fiction) about a school that began to isolate > > students > > > > with red hair, I believe it was, but that part is *really* fuzzy. > > > > This was a public grade school and I can't help wondering if it is > > > > common practice to show these experiments?! Probably a good idea, > > the > > > > more I think about it > > > > > > > > > > >it did not seem to be a > > > > > >case of setting it up to detect sadism. > > > > > > > > > > Certainly not - I see it as testing whether following an > > > > authority's > > > > > orders would win out over refusal to do something they did NOT > > want > > > > to > > > > > do, and for felt was wrong to do. > > > > > > > > > > >Milgrim was trying to > > > > > >determine the extent to which people would bow to authority. > > IMO, > > > > > > > > > > I got Milgram's book " Obedience to Authority " a couple of > > years > > > > ago, > > > > > but still haven't read it. It's available new and used through > > all > > > > the > > > > > usual sources (such as <http://www.bookfinder.com>). Here are > > the > > > > quite > > > > > interesting reviews on amazon.com: > > > > > > > > Thanks, I will look at those. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/006131983X/o/qid=991009870/sr= > > > > 2-1/re > > > > > f=aps_sr_b_1_1/107-0848120-9206122> > > > > > > > > > > >some of the people who gave the biggest shocks were not > > sadists. > > > > > > > > > > I'll have to read the book, but I don't recall anything about > > > > > sadists one way or the other (and one would have to give a > > separate > > > > > test to determine who were sadists) - these were all 'average, > > > > normal' > > > > > people. > > > > > > > > Yes. 's point was that although they were " average, normal, " > > that > > > > under the right circumstances it was " revealed " to them that they > > were > > > > " sadists " because some of them did shock the subjects to > > near-fatal > > > > levels. I disagree, but I can see that before I say one more word > > > > about it I would have to look at the source material again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.