Interview with psychologist Philip Zimbardo (Eugene Paashuis, VPRO Backlight 2011)

[HolyFictionOrg]

we're apes, the desire to punish others is what created god, it's deeply rooted in biology but it only "blossoms" fully when the cultural values accentuate these emotional triggers. Our system of property results in everyone accepting harm done to other individuals because we all know how hard we've had to work to acquire something that was stolen. human apes have poor ethical cognitive algorithms, but we have developed cultural extensions to assess these situations better then our CNS networks

[bassammaelborno]

An understanding of this, is really quite simple.

The "Superego" (our acquired sense of right and wrong) becomes suspended, allowing for the "Id" (our primitive impulses whether good or bad) to prevail.

The suspension of each individual's Superego within a group, is easily done, as it is tacitly condoned by observing it occuring in others. This may be further facilitated, if there happens to be a particular emotional component (love, hate, etc.), as this helps to overide cognition.

[JanRichardus]

It's Group Think brother, "our group vs them" bullshit.

[sullenboy1o3o]

The elephant in the room...

the guy looks like satan.

[JazSoon2bPharmD]

extremly informative!

[grasshopper97]

This interview raises a question. The study is based on that of, creating a system exterior of our own society. Therefore, when he says that these are people who are twisted by the system in which they have entered, are they remorseful for their actions due to their own moral compass? Or are they remorseful because they know that our society, the system in which they currently exist, will pass judgement and deliver consequence for their actions?

[Nadienne1]

@grasshopper97 When does he talk about remorse? When he talks about the system twisting people, he means that guards get twisted into brutalizers, and prisoners--even good people--have mental breakdowns, make irrational decisions, etc.

[grasshopper97]

@Nadienne1 That's why I asked the question. I've since read The Lucifer Effect, and while more enlightened on the subject, my curiosity is still piqued in regards to my question. An essay by Jennifer Jacquet in the book Future Science, titled "Is Shame Necessary?", supports my reasoning for the question. While I believe that there is indeed good in human beings, I come to question that good in regard to our particular society, as behaviors in the Stanford occur within it, albeit more subtly.

[Nadienne1]

@grasshopper97 I tend to agree with you about good in humans compared to good in society. But are you commenting on a peron's remorse (or shame, which is slightly different), or on society's apparent need to punish a person regardless of whether or not that person feels remorse?

[grasshopper97]

@Nadienne1 Sorry to create any confusion, but my question was pertaining to the idea of remorse within society. The society of Nazi Germany turned Jews into scapegoats, making it permissible to harm them without impunity. If they won, such behavior would still be in place. From the viewpoint of an individual raised in that society, do you think that remorse would exist for such actions? Or would life go on?

[paralaks]

Coud you please post the whole interview?

[bigoledicksdotcom]

Zimbardo is a sick man, not someone to be admired.

[oneGeronimous]

@bigoledicksdotcom

Why that? He is very aware of what happened, what his role was, and is professionally able to reflect on the experiment. It was a very crucial experiment that, because it escalated, gave him and the world a new insight in human behaviour. It explains what happened at Abu Graib, but is not a way to condone the actions.

Let's hope that with these insights, from his experiment and what happened at Abu Graib, we will be able to prevent this in the future.

[analucuta]

@bigoledicksdotcom why?

[Renegen1]

@bigoledicksdotcom May you explain why, beyond just insulting him because you don't agree with him?