Hi everyone,
Take a look at:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100317/tod-torture-game-show-draws-nazi-compari-870a197.html
Does this simply replicate the original psychology experiments on obedience by Stanley Milgram, or are there important differences?
In Milgram's work, authority was represented by a "scientist" figure. Who or what represents authority in this instance?
Does this "game show" tell us more about the power of individuals in positions of authority (Milgram's primary focus) or the power of institutions as a whole to mould our behaviour?
Do you think the reported "Nazi comparisons" could be justified? Is it OK for "lay people" to make such comparisons on the basis of this "game show" but not OK for a professional psychologist like Stanley Milgram to make similar comparisons?
If Milgram's findings on human behaviour are valid, what should be done in order to avoid the negative consequences that seem to stem from them? Are we drawn to the conclusion that society must somehow be "engineered" in ways that prevent certain circumstances from arising?
I believe this game show, unlike Milgram's experiment shows us the power of institutions as a whole rather than individuals in postions of authority. In the game show the presenter had the backing of the live audience hereby putting more pressure on the contestant making him or her relutantly yield to their request of punishment-some to the extent of "death." I however do not think its Nazi comparisons are justified because of the large number number of people demanding the same thing at the same time. It contributes to the contestant given in to their demands. Also the fact that it is TV show would make give the constestant less time to think about the consequences of his or her actions because he is working within a limited time space. You could even say the viewers at home had a subtle role to play in the contestant giving in to the demands for punishment. He or she may most likely think-after all the show must go on.
ReplyDeletehi :-)
ReplyDeleteI disagree to an extent with Shawn's point about it being a tv show and hence pressure on the contestant. This is not a trivial issue. It is about someone's life. Every "normal" person should not have to just act anyhow about such an issue. This is someone's life. The contestant therefore should care and worry about the person's life and should not worry about "spoiling the show".
I do not think the Nazi comparisons are justifiable because in this case, the contestant of the game was obeying orders because he/she actually had a choice.
I believe this tells us about the power of individuals in positions of authority because the contestant in the game show had to make decisions for him/herself.
I honestly don't think that this has as much to do with the power of television as to do with the power of peer pressure. Yes, obviously the authority figure has some effect on the situation but more times than not people are likely to follow their peers either because they wish to be accepted and get caught up in the moment.
ReplyDeleteEven in psychology it is a proven fact that people tend to stick together in decision and action making than make their individual opinions known. This is how hysteria is created after all.
I don't think the Nazi comparisons are justified as the Nazis knew what they were doing was definitely wrong however the audience would have obviously considered that no tv show would intentionally kill a person no matter how harsh the punishment.
Yes society does make mistakes but I feel that the end of the day faith must be placed in mankind and hope that we've learnt from our past mistakes.
The following is a comment from one of the participants’ of the game""Since I was a little girl, I have always asked myself why the Nazis did it," she said. "How could they obey such orders? And there I was, obeying them myself."
ReplyDelete"I was worried about the contestant," said another player. "At the same time, I was afraid to spoil the programme.Some observers were skeptical of the manipulative way the participants were handled. This game obviously does not simply replicate the original psychology experiments on obedience by Stanley Milgram. This game shows how a human being under constant fear, worry and threat can easily be psychological be controlled into doing things that they know they are wrong. The Nazi's knew how to put fear and I mean real fear into people. By this they managed to do everything through the use of people. One famous Nazi who was in full control of the Gas Chambers, has always been a surprise to me , the man used to kill more Nazi's than anyone , he cruelly murdered Jews and was covered in innocent blood from morning to evening. But this did not affect him from being a 'loving' and proper father to his family. The murders seemed not to affect him in any way. What can we say about such a man? Such people are always a threat to the society, they seem not to have any conscience and they are dead inside. Nazism represented authority whoever was in authority was never fought or opposed. But, it was no longer a person the Jews saw, all they saw in authority was death and suffering, slow death and a lot of suffering. This game though shows us the capability of humans to kill and mistreat people whenever the need comes. It shows how easy it is to be selfish and inconsiderate to felllow humans
Although this experiment was similar to Milgram’s, I agree with critics who say that it was a bit different.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, this experiment tells us more about the power of institutions in shaping a human being’s decisions: having someone there who can take responsibility for one’s actions such as a production company, an audience, a host to an extent means that you don’t have to worry about the consequences of your actions yourself. This played a role in the fact that the participants did not really consider the implications of their actions, they just followed orders conscious of the fact that if anything went wrong they would not be to blame as much as the person who gave them the orders.
Also on such a show I imagine that the cheering gets one excited and motivated to do anything to please the crowd. You would as much as possible not do anything to get booed off so if the audience asks for something you’d do it. I’m not saying that it’s right mind you, just that a lot of our daily lives try to do things to please others or so as not to offend others so a huge studio audience is even more intimidating!
Now this might be somewhat far off but I believe that the Nazi comparisons are justified to some extent. There are many similar elements; the host – an authority figure, the audience – the society with fellow Nazis. However there is one element missing – punishment. I am aware that people who disobeyed Nazi rules were punished sometimes by a sentence to a concentration camp. This fear of punishment which I believed would play a huge part in influencing people to conform to Nazi orders is however missing.
Now, what can we do to avoid the negative results of this experiment? In my opinion not much. People will always follow the leader whether for fear or just to plain suck up, aside from a few rebellious and strong-spirited people who will resist. I think the only real solution is for people to be careful that they only allow good people into power; people who will not take advantage of you and make you do bad things.
I agree with the fact that this experiment is different than when it was primarily done. I also personally feel that to some extent it is not really an experiment, because the results to some extent are already known.
ReplyDeleteThe host for the show is the 'authority' who I think holds the power to influence the individual. Whether it is by influencing the audience to influence the individual, or in a more direct way. I personally do not think that it was right to not use Stanley Milgram's experiment to make these comparisons, because it was for a better reason that a societal one.
For this reason I think that the Nazi comparisons could therefore be justified, due to the nature of the experiment and the 'authority'.
Society in this case talks about human beings, and I do not think that human beings can be "engineered" or steered into specific directions. Human beings are different, culturally and mentally so for this reason i say that these negative consequences cannot be avoided per se.