The hunter hunted
I didn’t know this – Zimbardo discovered that he’d become a subject of his own experiment. Read the whole thing; it’s fascinating.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations…Thus in 1971 was born the Stanford prison experiment, more akin to Greek drama than to university psychology study. I wanted to know who wins — good people or an evil situation — when they were brought into direct confrontation…Suddenly the guards perceived the prisoners as “dangerous”; they had to be dealt with harshly to demonstrate who was boss and who was powerless. At first, guard abuses were retaliation for taunts and disobedience. Over time, the guards became ever more abusive, and some even delighted in sadistically tormenting their prisoners…I was forced to terminate the projected two-week-long study after only six days because it was running out of control. Dozens of people had come down to our “little shop of horrors,” seen some of the abuse or its effects, and said nothing.
Until he invited a former student and current colleague.
We had started dating recently and were becoming romantically involved. When she saw the prisoners lined up with bags over their heads, their legs chained, and guards shouting abuses at them while herding them to the toilet, she got upset and refused my suggestion to observe what was happening in this “crucible of human nature.” Instead she ran out of the basement, and I followed, berating her for being overly sensitive and not realizing the important lessons taking place here. “It is terrible what YOU are doing to those boys!” she yelled at me…I too had been transformed by my role in that situation to become a person that under any other circumstances I detest — an uncaring, authoritarian boss man.
It wasn’t just the students, it was himself.
The implications of this research for law are considerable, as legal scholars are beginning to recognize. The criminal-justice system, for instance, focuses primarily on individual defendants and their “state of mind” and largely ignores situational forces…As my own experiment revealed, and as a great deal of social-psychological research before and since has confirmed, we humans exaggerate the extent to which our actions are voluntary and rationally chosen — or, put differently, we all understate the power of the situation…By recognizing the situational determinants of behavior, we can move to a more productive public-health model of prevention and intervention, and away from the individualistic medical and religious “sin” model that has never worked since its inception during the Inquisition…Group pressures, authority symbols, dehumanization of others, imposed anonymity, dominant ideologies that enable spurious ends to justify immoral means, lack of surveillance, and other situational forces can work to transform even some of the best of us into Mr. Hyde monsters, without the benefit of Dr. Jekyll’s chemical elixir. We must be more aware of how situational variables can influence our behavior. Further, we must also be aware that veiled behind the power of the situation is the greater power of the system.
This also sheds some light on the cruelty of the pope and his assistants, and the nuns at Golddenbridge. Group pressures, authority symbols, dehumanization of others, dominant ideologies – they had it all. Maybe even the ‘imposed anonymity’ – because they wore habits; they looked much alike. So: yet another lesson in what we keep learning and re-learning: beware of group pressures, authority symbols, dehumanization of others, imposed anonymity, dominant ideologies. Beware, beware, and beware again.
Interesting stuff. I’m a bit cautious about one of the conclusions he draws – “we humans exaggerate the extent to which our actions are voluntary and rationally chosen — or, put differently, we all understate the power of the situation”. True, but I’d be frightened like death of a view on criminal justice which would regard actions as wholly situationally and contextually motivated. Because some notion of individual self-determination and individual responsibility is essential to human dignity.
This said, his remarks concerning the prison system are well-taking. I’ve often wondered how locking up criminals together with other criminals and totally seperating them from society is going to make them better. Aside from the fact that a lot of “normal” prisons are thug-controlled hellholes, not just Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. I’ve no problem with the idea of revenge and punishment in criminal justice – but I have one against simply abandoning prisoners to the biggest and meanest guy in the group (among other prisoners or guards). Or girls, in Lynndie England’s case.
Yes, halfway through reading I thought of the nuns and what they did to Marie and her friends. There could certainly be a connection.
Generally scary.
“True, but I’d be frightened like death of a view on criminal justice which would regard actions as wholly situationally and contextually motivated.”
He doesn’t hold such a view, and says so in the article.
“Because some notion of individual self-determination and individual responsibility is essential to human dignity.”
But even if that’s true, it’s not an argument that it is true that individual self-determination and individual responsibility exist.
Actually, one could say that it’s essential to human dignity that the results of Zimbardo’s experiment be a bizarre unique weirdness – caused by a virus perhaps, or something in the water – rather than an indication of something about how people react to situations of dominance/subordination. But that doesn’t mean the results are just a one-off.
You have no problem at all with the idea of revenge in criminal justice? That seems a little bizarre.
“Generally scary.”
Yeah, it is. I can easily imagine myself reacting the same way. I have a real loathing of being in any situation of dominance or command – of having to tell anyone (especially an adult) what to do, however benignly. I just don’t like it. I have a feeling that’s why. It’s too creepy, too fraught. I’m always amazed by people who are quite happy to have servants and boss them around; I couldn’t bear it.
“He doesn’t hold such a view, and says so in the article.”
I know. And I actually agree with the way he put it. I reacted against a more abstract view – which is a possible one (as you indicate in your response) if not the one held by Zimbardo.
“But even if that’s true, it’s not an argument that it is true that individual self-determination and individual responsibility exist.”
Of course not. But something can be possible and yet scary at the same time. I find the possibility that a human being is no more responsible for his actions than a rock is for rolling down the hill extremely frightening. In fact, I don’t think it is quite the case either (but not for the reason it is frightening). This is an area, of course, where (like the whole free will issue) there’s a deep emotional involvement with our beliefs, and I’m aware of that.
I’m not sure why the notion that the criminal justice system must contain an element of revenge is bizarre. It’s basically the old “whatever you throw comes back at you” idea – and I’m not sure whether we can do without it, ultimately. One could recast the idea on utilitarian lines (i.e. the justice system serves to ensure social peace; to keep dangerous people away from potential victims; and to reform criminals) and even if that is all quite valid, there’s an element of retribution and closure that is left out if we cast the idea only on those lines.
Sure about the frightening thing. I misread the nuance there.
“why the notion that the criminal justice system must contain an element of revenge is bizarre.”
Ah but that’s not what I said because that’s not what you said – you said you had no problem with the idea. I realize all you say in reply, but I think the whole thing tends to give thoughtful people misgivings. Saying all you say in reply is consistent with having problems with the idea. (Also, haveing problems with the idea is consistent with having problems with the opposite of the idea. It’s an ambivalent subject – I mean a subject people are ambivalent about.)
Quite.
God/the Party/the Authorities are on our side – what we are doing is RIGHT.
And this leads straight to the Inquisition/Gulag/Konzentrazionslaager, with no break, pause or intermission.
And Socrates was killed, because he taught the youth of Athens to ask (too many) awkward questions.
Humiliating, crushing, degrading, mortifying tactics, by the Sisters of Mercy was also on children – on a frequent basic – – employed. For example, naked children, of all different development stages] were forced to line up while the Sisters of Mercy/untrained staff (with no references) painted them with benzene benzoate. The stinging pinkish, look a like, calamine lotion was boldly by the sisters/staff slapped and painted onto children. We had to spread-eagle our legs and arms and were ordered, – by them to turn around. Children cried buckets when it splashed into their eyes. The sisters of this mini torture did not excuse menstruating children. They sometimes whacked us with the blood stained pinkish mean looking Dante, hellish paintbrushes, if we did not cooperate. However, there was nobody to protect children from this inhumane practice. They owned our minds, bodies and souls. Goldenbridge children like Lynndie England victims WERE also easy pickings.
It has left an indelible nasty imprint on my psyche. When I saw the ever-powerful Schindler’s List film and all the naked bodies going into the chambers, I got flashbacks to the diabolical Goldenbridge Dante like painting experiences. READING THIS ARTICLE HAS ALSO BROUGHT BACK REMINDERS. We like the Lynndie England’ and Magdalen laundry girls were purely SLAUGHTER TO THE LAMBS. The difference between them and us was we were children ranging from the ages of six-sixteen.
This abominable unpardonable shocking ritual was common. There was no one to query the credentials of these SO CALLED PEOPLE OF GOD. People have in broad-spectrum empathised with this phenomenon in deference to teenagers in the Magdalen laundries and the pitiable inopportune people in Lynndie England’s case for the reason that the media highlighted it
It was not given by anyone, – any credence in relation to Goldenbridge,
Bernadette Fahy barely touched on it in her book about Goldenbridge. “Freedom of Angel’s”.
She told me that the publisher had to be very careful. It refrained from putting controversial material in the book. As it was too much of a hot potato! I also asked Christine Buckley why the monstrous contemptible painting episodes were by her not given attention, – in the Dear Daughter. Documentary.
She had so much on her plate. It is so ironical because the sisters did not allow us, – to strip naked in front of other children. Children were incessantly reprimanded; by the sisters and were told by them they were evil and dirty if they inadvertently showed their flesh to the Goldenbridge world. However, it was okay for us to be horded like animals into St Bridget’s while being stark naked, and to be treated, by the staff, – like we were numberless naked nonentities.
The sisters to the school laundry ordered children who did not cooperate. They were separately painted; the sisters – from them – invariably tore off, the clothes if they perchance decided to become more obstinate. Coloured children were especially by the sisters earmarked for more humiliating treatment as they were by them classed with being subhuman. The ambivalence of it all OF IT ALL BEGGARS BELIEF.
Yikes. Awful.
Clearly – the testimony of both Marie-Therese and Philip Zimbardo converges on a single point: people who are in positions of extreme power over others need to be closely supervised, and the supervisors need to be supervised, and so on – there need to be checks upon checks upon checks. Clearly it is not good for people to be in that situation.
There was a brilliant Irish made film about these schools Marie T. I forget the name but you probably Know the film I am talking about?
St Bridget’s should have read St. Philomena’s.
Dante painted the depiction of hell, the Sisters of Mercy painted children’s bodies and genetalia, it was hell incarnate, Lynndie England created a Lynndie England portrait on the world landscape, it too was living hell.
Richard, there was a film, “Song for a Raggy Boy”, which depicted the lives of boys in Industrial Schools such as Artane, Letterfrack, and Daingain. But as far as I can recall there was none regarding girls industrial schools such as Goldenbridge. It is such a pity.
The Magdalene [Magdalen] Sisters was a film about older girls in laundries. Some girls, from the industrial schools on reaching sixteen years were automatically transferred to the the Magdalen laundries. I went to see the film but walked out as I could not stomach it. I was going around for a whole week after like a headless chicken, snapping at every one who came in my way. The agitation was something to behold. This is a common feature with people who grew up in institutions, We are lacking in cognitive/adaptive skills. IN PLAIN ENGLISH, WE LIVE ON OUR NERVES.
The argument, given to the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse last summer for “painting Goldenbridge children” was Scabies scare. Painting children’s bodies & genitalia was surely going to get rid of it. They were just short of painting our entrails if they could have reached us there. We were rotten to the core. LIKE LEPERS, WE HAD TO BE CLEANSED! I would like to know why there were no doctors/nurses in sight. Why were children’s bodies in this manner violated, desecrated dishonoured, tainted despoiled? Yeah, right,, we were mottled flawed, defective. Our impresciptble rights, (article 41) was taken away from us as well as our dignity.
Marie t.I definately remember seeing an Irish film about young girls, it might have been a laundery type school, it is one of the most powerfull films I have ever seen,someone else must have seen it? help me with the name!
Richard,
The Magdalene Sisters
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0318411/
Thanks guys and girls you nailed it that was the film I was trying to remember,The Irish make some realy powerfull films these days if you get a chance check out inside I am dancing.
JohnMc Gahern’s novel The Dark was banned in Ireland for its implied clerical sexual abuse and other.
Amongst Women, is another strong novel.
The title can be interpreted in two ways. Firstly, the title refers to Moran’s largely female household, with much of the book focusing on the domineering relationship between the patriarchal Moran and the women surrounding him. The title also references the traditional prayer, the Hail Mary, which contains the clause “blessed art thou among women”. This prayer is significant as it is part of the Rosary, which is prayed everyday in the Moran household, and the event is a repeating motif throughout the novel.
Edna O’Brien originally practiced as a chemist, but published her first book, The Country Girls, in 1960. The Country Girls was the first part of a trilogy of novels (later collected as The Country Girls Trilogy) which also included The Lonely Girl (1962) and Girls in Their Married Bliss (1964). Shortly after their publication, these books were banned (and, occasionally, even burned in churchyards) in Ireland due to their frank portrayals of the sex lives of their characters.
The “girl with the green eyes” opened my eyes up to the stark reality of the thinking of girls in convent schools.
I NEVER TIRE OF EDNA O’ BRIENS BOOK DEPITE THEIR DARKNESS.
“And Socrates was killed, because he taught the youth of Athens to ask (too many) awkward questions.”
I read somewhere that Socrates was killed partly because he was telling aristocratic youth that only their class should rule and they should overthrow the then current democracy/mobocracy? pace I.F. Stone???
A bit late in the day, but: I am amazed that this famous experiment is given so much attention. A group of students engaged in a long role play does not tell us anything much about human nature. The ‘prisoners’ as I understand it, could leave at any time, which is a bit different from the usual condition of prisoners. This means that were consenting to all the ‘abuses’. You can see the same sort of thing is a dozen clubs in London on any Friday night. It was a game in other words, and a game in which I suspect the participants more or less consciously tried to offer the sorts of behaviours that they thought their professor might want to observe. I understand his girlfriend’s reaction, though. I don’t think anyone would be too please to find their enamorata enagaged in such an elaborate S&M fanatasy even if it was paid for by the faculty.