Added: 3 years ago
From: Cugel2006
Views: 134,666
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (192)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I think it works the same way with Teatards and ALEC/AFP "conservative" talk radio...

  • Harlow was a fucking asshole! What a fucking prick!

  • Replace the monkey with a human and have the scary robot to be "satan" and the fake mother monkey to be a fake book called the bible.

  • what a fucking nut job.

  • Cna't believe that "that looks DIABOLICAL" didn't make it as a top comment!

  • You people don't realize what time period this experiment was done in. Back then, colored people weren't even considered "human." Would you be that angered if the experiment was performed on a lab rat or an insect? I think not, but surely they're just as much alive as you and me. Just because there were less limits on what was considered appropriate doesn't mean they weren't doing it for a good cause.

  • @Ry0wn

    They weren't even considered human? ROFL! More sensationalist lies coming from these hipster potheads.

  • @JonestownHangover This happened before the African-American civil rights movement. You can still ask some older people today what their predisposition on black people is, and if they're cruel and traditional enough, they'll tell you something along the lines of what I said.

    But how did you know I was a hipster pothead :(

  • You guys might think this experiment wasn't bad but I've heard the other experiments Harlow has done have been really cruel.

  • That "scientist" would have to be the most useless waste of resources in the name of science. This pathetic experiment proves that.

  • remember guys this was a long time ago before animal rights groups were around. sadly this was what was needed to figure out their theories and to understand psychological stuff out, it is interesting though

  • @Crystalwolf78

    Actually hun, every real behavioral scientist of that period was utterly disgusted with Harlow and his 'experiments.' His little horror show with the monkeys was sickening to the true minds (and a major majority) of the community, who saw what he was doing as harmful to all of them, by making the public believe that real scientists used things with names like the 'rape rack' and 'dungeon of despair.'

    It was known then and now, that this kind of 'testing' is pointless and evil.

  • @GreyWouldBe

    I doubt he would have been president of the American Psychological Association if "every real behavioral scientist of that period was utterly disgusted with Harlow and his 'experiments.'" By the way, please don't call people hun; you'll come off as a dickhead.

  • @eray12345a

    No, I'm pretty sure, ironically, that someone who calls random knowledgeable people 'dicksheads' on the internet, is actually the very definition of the word 'dickhead.'

    If you'd like to pretend that what I said isn't common knowledge of the popular opinion of Harlow among his own people and the community, you can feel free. But what I said, you can find in any psych book that covers the topic, so it isn't my opinion or recycled WikiWisdom, it's actual fact.

  • How could they do that to a monkey?!?!?!? Taht monkey was so adorable!!!!!1

  • Thats Petty!!!!!!

  • love this video

  • While I do agree that animal testing is inevitably necessary to this day, this sort of experiment is just sadistic; beyond cruel -- and I don't see the benefit outweighing the cost.

    Hopefully we'll soon be able to genetically engineer non-sentient organisms to experiment on for medical purposes.

  • That sadistic scientist! I hope aliens kidnap him and terrify him with giant robots bigger than he is to see if he sobs looking for his mom.

  • @EpiquestGame he's dead.

  • @NonsensicalThe Yeah I had a feeling with how old this is.

  • Baby monkeys die in the wild all the time. The facts are that a baby monkey has a less then 40% chance of survival in the wild. They are killed by males, if food or water is scarce, the troop will just run off and leave the babies. They try to keep up, but they either end up dieing from dehydration or become easy prey. A male will kill an infant if it isn't his. This is not a quick death either, it can take up to a week from infection, and it's very painful. Nature isn't an utopia either.

  • @junkintrunk55 You are right!

  • @junkintrunk55 it would be more humane if we if installed a preprogrammed instant death in to the biology of these animals if they started to experience a lot of pain. Laugh at my suggestion if you will, but this is becoming a very real possibility and humanity hasn't let nature limit us yet.

  • @egokick Actually, I think that is a very good idea.

  • "Common sense" at the time dictated the opossing view of this experiments. Harlow proved in this experiments that the "common sense" at the time was wrong.

  • Paradigm Penguin, you are wrong. No monkeys ever died in isolation.

  • @paradisezeppelin They died as after effects of isolation

  • needless, to the point of ridiculous experiment, and, like all his BARBARIC experiments, only serving to satisfy his OWN sadistic impulses - state funded. Just like the Milgram experiments, that only served to satisfy the sadism of a certain scientist. As I said before, a true member of the Mengele stable of pseudo-'scientists'.

  • @7plus77 You very clearly have no understanding of how, and for what purpose, these experiments were conducted and even more evidently have no grasp of the results. Both the above experiment and Milgram's obedience experiments were conducted for specific reasons, and both supplied very useful information. The former dealt with the various roles played by parents and which were most important in different ways, and the latter dealt with why and when people are most likely to be obedient.

  • forget the debate of whether Harlows experiments were cruel or not....the bigger question is, Why was he doing such in-depth studies of things that common sense alone would supply and answer for?..This is what I have always wondered with Harlow....of course the monkey is going to run away when confronted by something like this if it has never seen it before....we actually needed extensive research to know this?..Harlow is infamous for just this type of wasteful "research"

  • @johnny2366 You're missing the point. The experiment was set up so that there were two "mothers": one made of wire mesh which provided food, and one which provided comfort.  What was interesting is that the monkey ran to the mother which provided the "comfort", as opposed to the mother which provided the food.

  • @Etyrnal2K lol..my point IS the point....everyone knows what his objective was...the point is, many of his studies were a waste of money ...Harlow had to find " creative" ways to use the money he was receiving to conduct his studies or risk losing it...the result, often times, was studies like this where common sense can explain alot if not everything he was doing...the particulars of this study or that study have nothing to do with the point I was making

  • There's a cut at 0:52.

  • Is this what inspired Peter Gabriel to write his hit song?

  • Least he's not "beating his money" lol

  • What is wrong with you people, what do you think a natural environment is like for these animals??? It is pretty much the same if not worse, I assure you? The monkeys are receiving food on a regular basis and we learned so much from this experiment, you benefit from experiments like these every day and then you damn the people who do them. That is so unfair.

  • @Wheelsgr yes we do learn from experiments! but not ones like this, this was a cruel and inhumane thing to do! he was only doing it because he was a damaged man himself! non of his colleagues actually agreed that this was a valid experiment and they could all see other ways of getting similar results using people from damaged and isolated backgrounds and studying them just as he did with these monkeys.

  • @Wheelsgr

    I agree wholeheartedly. If it weren't for this kind of research, the development of many drugs and medicines would have been, best case scenario, delayed. It's a necessary evil but it has saved the lives of many. The only other alternative would be to conduct research on criminals, perhaps those that were already sentenced to death row.

  • @rollingwith24s research on criminals? thats just as disgusting, you people want your medicine SO bad that youre will to sacrifice anything to get it (ex: another human being). I think I need to conduct an experiment on people lacking love, compassion and care for others...I honestly think you have a problem, the way you think is not okay. I dont understand why so many people are so proud of these experiments. Maybe something is just wrong with me though, for caring so much about others.

  • @cookieCRUNCHER2

    I think you need to reread what I said more carefully before hastily spouting out your "opinion." I stated that the only realistic alternative would be to conduct research on criminals. I didn't say that we should.

    Oh, and you'd be surprised how many people would "ok" a decision to conduct said research on criminals. I'm sure a good third of the US population would at least.

  • @cookieCRUNCHER2

    Also how old are you? Because you come off as very young and immature.

  • @rollingwith24s youre right, im 16:) but dont tell me im immature just because i think of something differently, I doubt ill think hurting animals for our benifit will be good 20 years from now...

  • @cookieCRUNCHER2

    Did you even read my other comment? Being two years younger than me is no excuse to lack basic reading comprehension skills...

  • @rollingwith24s but english being my second language is ;) 

  • @cookieCRUNCHER2

    No, what you're doing is called selective information intake. As in ignoring my comment in favor of another. The language barrier doesn't account for that one, but nice try ;)

  • @rollingwith24s okay tell me which comment to read and i will

  • Hmmm. It'd be nice to get Harlow and Brady et al, all the other sick "scientists", together in a SAW-like scenario and replicate their experiments on them.

    And to all those who support this type of suffering I'd like to wish upon you the concept of reincarnation and hope you, too, experience the executive monkeys experiment and the pit of despair.

  • What Harry Harlow was investigating was the subject of attachments. He performed this experiment to study which 'surrogate' mother the young monkey will flee to. One of the mothers was a wire mesh frame that consisted of a food supply and the other was a frame covered in a soft, warm material. He was trying to distinguish which one the monkey would flee too when threatened. The baby monkey as show went to the material covered mother not the primary food supplier as previous research suggested.

  • harlow was awesome, torturing monkeys and getting paid lololol

  • thumbs up if you are studying psyc 1002!!

  • That wasn't funny thats called "ABUSING ANIMAL"

  • The monkey's like, "YAAAH TRICK, YAAH!"

  • hahahahahah that is fucking funny

    

  • This is as interesting as it is horrifying. I don't think this guy much cared for animals.

  • Who on earth would have thought that babies need love? Gosh, experiments like this were SO important, and mean that when we finally move to vat-grown humans, we know that the mother surrogate must be warm and soft and that the ability of the mother to express anything, doesn't matter at all!

  • @RideFlame Monkeys operate on reaction and instinct. They are not capable of :love" "hate""hope" etc. I have seen a baboon throw her baby at a predator to escape. Some thimes the mama drage the baby to death. When a new leader takes over, he kills all the babies so the females go in heat and mate with him.

    Don't put human traits on these things, it doesn't fit.

  • @junkintrunk55 and I've seen human mothers abandon push chairs and run away when I walk past with a dig on a lead. Humans are just animals too.

  • Poor Monkey. I want to reasure it and cuddle it. I bet Harlow was one heck of a Mama's boy himself. I'd like to chase him around with a machine gun and chart down his reaction.

  • this is very sad. I don't think this experiment was necessary. Just by human experimentation we know that affection for children is needed, no need to abuse animals.

  • @mmnabii The point is that before these experiments where conducted psychologists believed that positive affection shown to children was detrimental to their development. Harry Harlow was considered a fool for suggesting otherwise. This was in the 1950's when animal experimentation was generally seen as acceptable, and without such experimentation Harlow's theory (and what is now viewed as common sense) would have not been deemed credible.

  • something that always kind of bothered me...so obviously animal psychology is close enough to human psychology for them to act as our laboratory "substitutes," and yet they get HORRIBLE treatment in labs, not even close to what would be considered "humane" for a human being (even when they're not being experimented upon). i've worked in labs for a few years and the conditions there - even in this era of animal rights and whatnot - are pretty dismal. really sad actually .

  • I understand that this kind of research sheds critical light on human development, but how can anyone dispassionately carry out any of these experiments?

  • that thing is terrifying

  • THAT LOOKS DIABOLICAL!!!!! O_O

  • i understand that these experiments gave us a lot of knowledge but i still can't help but feel sad for those poor monkeys who spend their lives scared and alone.

  • harry harlow was the diabolical monster, not his stupid mechanical dick

  • I wouldn't call this torture. Scaring an infant (monkey), yes -- but no worse than letting a toddler watch a scary movie. Remember infant (monkeys) are hard-wired to be scared witless of nightmares for a reason. They have to learn how to confront potentially lethal frights. In the wild, the monkey (or hunter-gatherer) kid would face gruesome threats. Why do you think kids enjoy scary stories? Because an element of comfort&love is exactly that -- overcoming fear of outside threats.

  • ajajaj that iss soo funyy!! lol.

  • this experiment proved that you can't deny care and affect as a form of punishment. yet, millions of parents punish their kids with threats of abandon and lack of security, instead of teaching them how to have empathy and how to understand the natural world around them.

  • @includao Very well put. Most do not understand how all of these experiments can relate to young children and their effect on growing up.

  • God, I love science.

  • I love how comparatively straight-talking Harlow was, calling it 'love' rather than 'attachment'.

  • That is an epic win.

  • Thats diabolical!

  • Thats diabolical!

  • what a moron this test does nothing or proves jack stupid ass man what a poor way 2 live as a monkey

  • 0:51 is the most I've laughed in a while.

  • Harlow is a sick man.

  • @miznikki2u Do you have a background in developmental psychology? If you did, I would higly doubt you would call this 'sick'

  • @ledzepsarah Actually I am majoring in developmental child psychology right now, and I was taught that this experiment was done on monkeys because they are the most like humans, so would you treat a human infant like this and put them through this psychological torture? Well then why is it okay to treat a monkey like this?

  • @miznikki2u It's been done (broadly speaking). If you haven't heard of Watson and Rayner, not to mention "Little Albert" you're either in the worst developmental psychology program on earth or just an idiot.

  • @Etyrnal2K when did I ever ask for your opinion??

  • @miznikki2u When did anyone ever ask for yours?

  • @Etyrnal2K good comeback... :)

  • @lmarcsilva Hah, thanks. This sort of ignorance really irritates me.

  • Wow, this guy kicks ass!

  • Good grief!! The diabolical object is like WALL-E gone wrong!

  • what kind of monkey is that?

  • reuses

  • This guy Harlow was an idiot. All of his experiments were worthless. They either demonstrated in monkeys something that was already known to be the case in humans, or they sought to prove through the use of monkeys things that could have been observed in humans without the use of an animal model. Part of being a good scientist is gathering lots of data from a MINIMUM of resources. Harlow did the opposite. He gathered little data at the expense of a great deal of resources--primate lives.

  • Oh well they're just monkeys.

  • Harlow was a complete low-life, but as I;ve discovered recently, if there's one thing that his experiments did do was that it proved that animals such as monkeys are emotional rather than purely instinctive.

    I pointed these out to some idiot who was claiming that monkeys were non-sentient and would not be traumatized by experiments what Harlow's experiments did...and felt a little horrified that they were actually being used to further my argument against these experiments.

  • interesting video but i felt sorry for the baby monkey

    he/she was reacting just like a human

  • This happened like fifty years ago people, relax. Also, he is not doing it to torment the monkeys intentionally but to clearly show what organisms would choose. Nature or Nurture. Also, for those saying it's no different if we do it to humans, I'd like to see you choose a human baby over a baby monkey to be apart of the experiment.

  • That doesn't make it any less repellent whenever it was done. I don;t really see what your point is.

  • knowledge at the price of a few monkeys.... we have always sacrificed something in the quest for scientific knowledge. get over your monkey loving retardation :P

  • i have taken 2 psych classes and think of experiments like this is inhuman. Harlow was is crazy person and should have this kind of treatment done to him to see how it really feels. I have read a complete article on the experiments done by Harlow and the just get worse and worse.

  • Before you start jumping on Harlow consider that he could've performed his experiments on humans. Instead her performed them on animals. Back then this was the better alternative. Unless they see the effects, they wouldn't understand the causes of insecure attachment seen in children today.

  • what did he really prove, children need comfort WOW couldnt have figured that out on my own Thanks for torturing innocent animals. ITS COMMON SENSE

  • The majority of people involved with this experiment originally believed we don't need care, and that we only needed/ wanted something that would provide us food. This experiment was one to prove that we need nurturing,comfort, and care, not just food.

  • While I agree that this was torture, it's common sense NOW due to this study. Psychologists used to believe that babies attached to those who provided nourishment based specifically on that. As the "wired" mother fed the monkey, they seeked comfort thru the cloth mother (the one the mokey ran to). Also, thanks to this study we have a greater respect for animal welfare which in turn prevent such primate studies and gives proof to animal activists today who stand against animal experimentation.

  • It wasn't common sense prior to the study. There have been times in our past when the parents had little to no involvement in rearing the child. Showing compassion or affection towards the child was even viewed as a sign of weakness. Without Harlow, things might've continued that way.

  • What makes this man and his legacy so appalling is that even when knew he couldnt extrapolate any more relevant data from these animals, he still felt the need to repeat the experiments with the sole intent of making them more cruel and sadistic each and every time

  • I was making a point.

    You describing it as 'retardation' just makes you sound immature as you're trying to level your argument at the person rather than the subject.

    Grow up.

  • My point was, it does not make the experiments any better that they were conducted a long time ago.

    If you had paid attention I was n ot even saying 'It is wrong' I was saying that it is still repellant regardless of when it was done. You just came up with some stock insult without even reading.

    You missed the point entirely. Entirely.

  • Not to mention, if you attacked the argument instead oif the person, trying to insult others into agreeing with you. People might take you more seriously.

    I could call you a retard, but it adds nothing to my argument.

  • those poor rhesus monkeys were so messed up when they became adults. they constantly went into the fetal position, or began rocking uncontrollably/ pulling their own hair out.

    it was so sad...

  • Does anyone know where this footage comes from?

  • No, actually they do not. Or, rather, they don't in the sense that you're talking about. You're anthropomorphising them enough to have human feelings, when in fact, they don't. Love for a mother yes, "feelings" no.

  • so teh monkey "felt" insecure for no reason? you know that our "feelings" are just smart methods for getting to our goal, right? we have no soul or any other more meaning than a monkey...

  • you're wrong!

  • poor monkey! just a baby... should be with his real mother.

  • This parts interesting. A monkey with a wire mother, goes apeshit. Monkey with no mother, goes apeshit. Monkey with cloth mother, it becomes confident and fights back.

  • this is soooo fucking messed up & it's obvious that the monkey would run the it's mother. watch ur ass get scared like that !! u need to stop doing research on little baby monkeys. but those people who did this will get their own little pay back!

  • Lmao.

    "You need to stop doing research!"

    This occurred fifty years ago, and it completely changed parenting for the better. You don't know what you're talking about. And they did get their payback. In lots and LOTS of money. Harlow got some sort of huge award if I remember correctly. =D

  • it looks DIABOLICAL!!!!

    roflmao omg

  • Bloody hell! I'm sure if they showed that to a human child, it was scream it's lungs out too!

  • I love this monkey. he is so cute. You need to see the monkey experiment with the cocaine. the monkey will take the cocaine instead of the food time and time again, and die doing so. drugs are addictive and the scientists, the government and the drug dealers know this, but people are thrown to jail, and most treatments don't work. I say one thing; happy people don't do drugs. keep them unhappy and they will turn to drugs more than half of the time. and when they do, half of those will never stop

  • i don't know why this comment has had two fingers down(now one, because of my vote). it's totally like politics105 says. but happy people uses drugs too. humans dont need to be happy to be healthy. sometimes, the system in which we are immerse, gives us everything and we just get "bored" of all that we've achieved. at that moment, the inquisitive behaviour makes its appearance...and drugs are really easy to get. and, of course, extremely addictive.

  • I want that robot as an alarm clock!!!

  • this shows how cruel humans really are.

    Yah we need to do research but what the hell did we learn from this jack shit

  • No, we certainly learned a surprising amount about proper parenting from these experiments, granted at the unfortunate expense of a monkey's childhood. Parents learned that it is wrong to withhold affection from their children as punishment, or for fear of making them soft. The need for comfort and security is natural, and even overrides that of food, as Harlow showed us in his other experiments.

  • @ParadigmPenguin Im pretty sure parents would have loved their kids anyways, unless they have some sort of mental issue in which case this didnt help anybody once again because if they have a mental issue, i doubt theyd take the time to give a fuck about this guys experiments.. This was so pointless and this guy is exactly why im sad for being human

  • @cookieCRUNCHER2 Hahaha you underestimate the power of persuation. Maternal instincts can be overridden.

  • @ParadigmPenguin This could be learned much more accurately from huamn observation, not huamn experiment.

  • @ParadigmPenguin you are quite wrong. even if parents do withhold affection from a child, this child, under normal circumstances will still be able to get at least some comfort from other human beings, family members, friends, even toys etc. Some of these monkeys were left to literally ROT in isolation without even being given the dummy mother. After a while they would die from despair. When asked, why he would do such a thing, he said, he wanted to 'show what depression feels like'. A Swine.

  • go take a few psychology courses..... and i'd be curious to see how cruel you think humans are for eradicating numerous viruses at the expense of animals.

  • incredible professor now lets go see that time machine in the other room!!

  • "that looks diabolical"

    LMAO

  • I think this guy was a true scientist.  Objective. Just work. Regarded life different. & back then it was normal.

  • Wow, at least in my psychology exam i will definitley remember criticisms for his studies. I mean, was he at ALL ethical?

  • At least he didn't use human babies.

    There's always that.

  • that is true lol

  • Maybe he didn't, but others have. They use special cases where babies were already submerged into a similar situation. Even though the child may be taken away from that environment, they're behavior is just too hard for the scientists to resist and they spend years analyzing and doing tests. For example: Itard. The boy that lived in the woods all his life and was taken out, only to be considered completely inadequate in civilization. So they observed him and studied him, giving him no peace.

  • Hawlow seems to have enjoyed this way too much. I mean he called the restraining device he used to mate his monkeys.. 'rape machienes'. ? WTF.

  • 'Rape racks'. Don't make it sound worse than it is.

  • i guess you have to ask yourself: is the information we learn from these experiments really worth such cruelty? I don't think it is.

  • i don't blame him, that robot thing scared the crap out of me too.

  • the monkey was so pity!!!!

  • Where can i get one of those robots?

  • The monkey runs away when it's scared. Well, DUH!

  • hes next to hitler in hell

  • Okay, that "diabolical" robot made me crack up... We're studying this experiment in my child development class, but in the photos and text in our textbook, it talks about how he used "cooties," not this weird robot. The "cooties" were those weird bug toys that you assembled as part of some game.

    I feel bad for these poor animals, but at least we learned some things about human development... Does anyone know if these monkeys were returned to their real parents later, though?

  • I'm not exactly sure if they were returned, but usually the damaged monkeys were never the same again ... turns out there's a certain length of time ...like 90 days or less to where they can be normal. Over that, they never become normal... it's so sad!

  • Actually, we're studying this in my developmental psychology class too, and the monkeys all actually died after a couple months from malnourishment. They starved to death because they refused to go to the wire mother anymore.

  • thats not even funny. not at all this is so cruel i cant believe someone could do that and laugh about it

  • I agree. Why all the thumbs down? Makes one ask themselves, DOES the end justify the means? I say no. It was not fair that these baby monkeys had to undergo such lifelong trauma.

  • If there is a hell, Harry Harlow's been put through the same devices he subjected those creatures to. Like his "iron maiden", "pit of despair", and "rape rack".

  • Harry Harlow likes it! I know he does!

  • Harlow's research, though controversial, has provided insight into the behaviors of abused children and has improved methods of providing care to institutionalized children. While many of his experiments would be considered unethical today, their nature and Harlow's descriptions of them heightened awareness of the treatment of laboratory animals and thus paradoxically contributed somewhat to today's ethics regulations.

  • Harlow's experiments were controversial, and as a result, his research was influential to many in the animal rights movement

  • I find this disturbing but when this reasearch was done it was an acceptable practise

  • Because wasting so many man hours and money to establish that creepy ass robots scare baby monkeys is intensely important...

  • IT LOOKS DIABOLICAL!

    This vid made me laigh for 5 minutes strait. That wind up toy looks like something out of a Tim Burton movie.

    If you all think this is sick you should read up on some more experiments done to animals.

  • Show us the light... why it is necessary?

  • It revealed some important things about attachment in humans. It showed that babies are more attached to the parents that give more comfort, rather than ones that just give biological needs.

    I'm not saying I approve of this type of research. I'm simply explaining what it has revealed.

  • it was the SINGLE biggest contribution to attachment theory, actually.

  • "That looks DIABOLICAL."

    Hahaha. Poor monkey. :[

  • Holy shit Psychologists are insane!

  • Aw that monkey is so cute...

  • Love this video! What happens if there is only the wire mother? What happens if the plush monkey is cold and the wire monkey is warm? Too many unanswered questions; need a few more studies, if the bleeding hearts will allow that.

  • Actually Harlow's former students conducted more studies.If there's only wire mother baby monkey will ignore it during situations similar to this one.Same thing wih variated 'body' heat:baby always goes to plush mother..The most relevant factor is the fabric of surogat mother softness ect. and temperature comes after that..but i hope that they won't replicate this kind of studies...

  • Woahh... ethics??!

  • this is what's really happening when the nice doctor asks "what is your worst memory from childhood?"

  • that wud scare me lol

  • thats diabolical!

  • Aggh! It's Satan's toy!