iginal or profound:
“Milgram’s study demonstrated with brutal clarity that ordinary individuals could be induced to act destructively even in the absence of physical coercion, and humans need not be innately evil or aberrant to act in ways that are reprehensible and inhumane. While we would like to believe that when confronted with a moral dilemma we will act as our conscience dictates, Milgram’s obedience experiments teach us that in a concrete situation with powerful social constraints, our moral sense can be all too easily overwhelmed.”
Milgram’s interest in the study of obedience partly emerged out of a deep concern with the suffering of fellow Jews at the hands of the Nazis and an attempt to fathom how the Holocaust could have happened.
Open any psychology textbook on Milgram and you’ll see the same basic story. Which suggests that this is more a question of sloppy editing than of stealing someone’s ideas.
Now if Persaud had wanted to take a more interesting contrarian view of Milgram – not, admittedly, a likely scenario – he could found all he needed here and here. [For reasons known only to Typepad, you have to scroll down to read the posts.]
(via Norm)
Leave a Reply