Quote from Garland Greene aka the Marietta Mangler »
"Now you're talking semantics. What if I told you insane was working 50 hours a week in some office for 50 years, at the end of which they tell you to piss off... Ending up in some retirement village, hoping to die before suffering the indignity of trying to make it to the toilet on time. Wouldn't you consider that to be insane?"
"Define Irony: Bunch of idiots dancing on a plane to a song made famous by a band that died in a plane crash"
I would have to be part of the experiment to correctly answer it.
But i would say no. Once in my life i would surely do it. Now days I can gladly make a better distinction between secular rules and abstract rules (the real rightful rules).
Hell no. While I'd like to claim higher moral grounds as my sole reason why not, it's also because I find torture (or just inflicting pain in general) squicky.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
It depends on a few things. What are the repercussions this authority is capable of inflicting on me? What kind of person is the target? If I choose not do do these things to this person, is someone else just going to do it in my stead? How much respect do I have for this figure?
I've always been one to discuss when I disagree, rather than act immediately on orders. I think everyone benefits from doing just that. I'm not a tool or a weapon. I have sympathy for those in pain, and wouldn't cause it for no reason.
To be fair, attitudes towards authority figures, especially doctors, are quite different now and then. I always thought that people don't consider this when they refer to that particular experiment.
One thing that people who hear about this don't consider is that the volunteers knew it to be an experiment. Thus, even if their actions caused harm to someone else, they could easily rationalize it in their heads as being necessary. Thus, they don't actually mind doing it.
Ergo, you can't actually say that people are evil, etc, as some people I've seen say based on this experiment. This experiment operated within a specific set of rules, and the volunteers' actions relied on those rules being true. Can't assume anything outside of said rules.
To be fair, attitudes towards authority figures, especially doctors, are quite different now and then. I always thought that people don't consider this when they refer to that particular experiment.
One thing that people who hear about this don't consider is that the volunteers knew it to be an experiment. Thus, even if their actions caused harm to someone else, they could easily rationalize it in their heads as being necessary. Thus, they don't actually mind doing it.
Ergo, you can't actually say that people are evil, etc, as some people I've seen say based on this experiment. This experiment operated within a specific set of rules, and the volunteers' actions relied on those rules being true. Can't assume anything outside of said rules.
but the experment has been done a bunch of times and got same results. it even says so in the wikipeda link
Look at the Stanford Prison Experiment, to which other experiments in the same spirit did not have the same outcomes.
After seeing what hate and fear brings, I would use every instrument of power at my disposal to obliterate that authority's career and credibility and pursue that to a degree of which they would learn what authority really means. Authority is war.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
Depends on what said figure is capable of doing to me, also what would I get out of it. If its nothing on both counts, then I see no reason to proceed with either slaughter or torture.
I think it would also have to depend on someone's ethics for judging different actions as well. Obviously if you look at militaries, people don't mind torturing people who are obvious enemies. If would be a different story if it were random civilians, which is why torturing random civilians is easily a high criminal offense, assuming the people in charge have enough integrity to openly admit that their soldiers faulted and did such a horrible thing unlike cases such as Mai Lai.
I would never torture or kill people just because I was told to. I would never just follow orders.
However,
I would do such things if I had reasoned them to be necessary means to an end. I'm not all too squeamish about killing/causing pain. If it wasn't completely illegal, I'd probably enact some vigilante justice on child molesters and rapists. Sadly, the law doesn't permit me to do so, and for now, I still have a shred of faith that our justice system can be reformed and fixed and evil people will actually be properly punished.
When I joined the Marines, I felt that I would kill if I needed to. Not to follow orders, but because I believed that in the right circumstances, I would be fighting for a good cause.
This was before 9/11.
After 9/11, I actually protested much of our actions, I felt we were punishing the wrong people.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Probably not.
I rarely respect authority in the first place, and even if I did, I don't like hurting people unless they did something bad to me or to people I know.
Your framing distorts the issue. The person in the lab coat never says "torture this person" they ask you to "continue the experiment". Naturally people's reactions to the two commands are very different. Almost no one would torture someone if ordered to, lots of people will do so in a situation where they are uncertain.
Milgram and the subsequent "banality of evil" or when ordinary people are placed into situations that encourage conformity but are already corrupt in nature. (pressing the button and shocking the person.)
Milgram was a meaningful study because while most people said they would not go along with it, the findings showed that most people did as instructed, to the detriment of the other "person" (recording).
Depends on whether I believed they actually had said authority, along with my belief that there was a good reason for said action. If either of those criteria were missing, then definitely not. Otherwise...it's hard to know how you'd act until the opportunity arose.
No. As much as I think violence/murder towards people that legitimately deserve it kick untold amounts of ass (murderers, rapists, people who have mutilated other beings unprovoked), I would not kill or torture someone simply because I was ordered to; I would actually protest.
If it was determined that they were any of the above (murderers, rapidts, mutilators), THEN I would gladly inflict as much pain as I could, then eventually off the person; THAT would be okay as they have forfeited their rights and status as human beings.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is pretty interesting.
But i would say no. Once in my life i would surely do it. Now days I can gladly make a better distinction between secular rules and abstract rules (the real rightful rules).
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
I've always been one to discuss when I disagree, rather than act immediately on orders. I think everyone benefits from doing just that. I'm not a tool or a weapon. I have sympathy for those in pain, and wouldn't cause it for no reason.
One thing that people who hear about this don't consider is that the volunteers knew it to be an experiment. Thus, even if their actions caused harm to someone else, they could easily rationalize it in their heads as being necessary. Thus, they don't actually mind doing it.
Ergo, you can't actually say that people are evil, etc, as some people I've seen say based on this experiment. This experiment operated within a specific set of rules, and the volunteers' actions relied on those rules being true. Can't assume anything outside of said rules.
but the experment has been done a bunch of times and got same results. it even says so in the wikipeda link
this is scary stuff if u ask me
After seeing what hate and fear brings, I would use every instrument of power at my disposal to obliterate that authority's career and credibility and pursue that to a degree of which they would learn what authority really means. Authority is war.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
However,
I would do such things if I had reasoned them to be necessary means to an end. I'm not all too squeamish about killing/causing pain. If it wasn't completely illegal, I'd probably enact some vigilante justice on child molesters and rapists. Sadly, the law doesn't permit me to do so, and for now, I still have a shred of faith that our justice system can be reformed and fixed and evil people will actually be properly punished.
When I joined the Marines, I felt that I would kill if I needed to. Not to follow orders, but because I believed that in the right circumstances, I would be fighting for a good cause.
This was before 9/11.
After 9/11, I actually protested much of our actions, I felt we were punishing the wrong people.
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
I rarely respect authority in the first place, and even if I did, I don't like hurting people unless they did something bad to me or to people I know.
Thanks Argentleman;)
WB Teysa token aggroBW (retired)
MAKING (Onmath, Numot, maybe something in Esper)
Your framing distorts the issue. The person in the lab coat never says "torture this person" they ask you to "continue the experiment". Naturally people's reactions to the two commands are very different. Almost no one would torture someone if ordered to, lots of people will do so in a situation where they are uncertain.
Milgram was a meaningful study because while most people said they would not go along with it, the findings showed that most people did as instructed, to the detriment of the other "person" (recording).
Big Thanks to Xeno for sig art <3.
If it was determined that they were any of the above (murderers, rapidts, mutilators), THEN I would gladly inflict as much pain as I could, then eventually off the person; THAT would be okay as they have forfeited their rights and status as human beings.