By doing this experiment, Milgram actually taught us how to be aware of our evil and weaknesses, and at least, give me a chance to not follow orders blindly
That doesn't actually work though, repeats of the experiment with subjects that know about the experiment still had similar results. The relevant variable is not awareness of the experiment, it is the environment (that includes an authority figure). Awareness doesn't matter, only the inherently human response to authority does. It takes serious anti-authoritarian conditioning to even have a chance of refusing to follow the orders of the authority.
You skipped parts of the experiment. The subjects were diff ages (starting young, 18 yrs to older 35 yrs old). The older ones were prone to refuse to go all the way of the experiment and even quit (something around 30-40%, if not more) but the younger ones "blame" that the "authority" made them do it and they had no choice. This is why the Army is always looking to very young adults to have them join in, because they follow orders and think of consequences less. The Israelis army is a bit different, they give room to decision on the squad -- so it's a different psychological framework.
I’m guessing the difference between the age groups was largely due to a sort of inherent authority that comes with greater age/seniority. For example, a 20 year old subject would likely see the person conducting the experiment as a stronger source of authority than a 40 year old subject.
I guess the different "psychological framework" make them unanimously agree to kill innocent Palestinians. Not even sparing journalists, nurses or kids.
It takes a kind of interior stubborn-ness in order to stand up for what you believe in. You have to be the kind of person that values what they think about themselves more than what others think of them because the social pressure to go with the crowd can be very hard to ignore unless you are prepared to be disliked and to actively rock the boat and be a vocal minority when you see people doing something you consider wrong. That's step 1. Step 2 is you have to ignore the temptation to abuse power. That is a little easier if your have a strong moral code, however your mind can trick you into thinking you're doing something for moral reasons, when the reality is you're doing them for selfish ones. So you have to constantly second guess your motivations, look for your own bias, and where possible, defer some of your authority to others or at least allow them to critique your use of power so you can avoid falling into the trap of "I'm doing this for the greater good, not because I enjoy it (wrings hands together and starts drooling)"
I wonder if the results would have been different if the "student" had been in the room so that the "teacher" could see them. Would so many people have been able to go to 450 volts if they could see a human face? The mask mandates have me thinking about that.
Good point. You are right that seeing the misery inflicted might have reduced the acceptance of authority. But think of it this way: the regular people in society rarely actually witness the evil they ask their governments to do in their names. We merely vote, but the atrocities are committed out of our ear and eyeshot.
I still can be broken, especially when you add peer pressure and the consequence of loosing something. Remember the Nazis and any other system like this like in many prisons or concentration camps around the world or just any corrupt totalian systems or mafia structures. Once people are in the fear of loosing something like family, position, wealth is so painful, they prefer inflicting this pain to others to stay safe? I assume the eye barrier is just like a 5th question in this case but you can easily overcome it with peer pressure. Allow eye contact and add a actor "audience / judges" who put pressure on the person. Most people are just weak to stand up, even if there are no consequences for themselves.
You're right. The data shows that increasing the perceived distance to the "victim" makes it easier to be cruel (which is why we can't ignore a crying child on the street but easily can let thousands starve to death on another continent). That can happen by influencing how we think about other people (dehumanizing or demonizing "them", often used in racism), or by literally creating walls.
I remember the Milligram experiment, I witnessed a portion of it on TV and remember thinking at the time: 'What is wrong with these people, why don't they just refuse to continue?' I was just a child at the time but I remember it clearly. Looking back at my childhood I realise now that I had and still have a rebellious streak and a mind of my own that I refuse to hand over to any authority figure. I now witness with despair the sheep-like behaviour of my fellow man and woman. I'll leave you to guess my feelings about our current world-wide political and medical situation...
Yes, I also am a bit different. But when we differ from society, we suffer due to maladaptive behaviours, and develop personality disorder. I have been formally and medically diagnosed with two of them. But it is these different people who change the world, and turn it into a better place.
@@mayanksingla3244 I'm sorry. I was being sarcastic, just so you know. What I meant to say is that it's always the dumbest people who think they're not the sheeps and they are completely obvious to all the nuances so it's a thought that you should be putting to the test.
Because normally a human lives under fear and anxiety, It's all about survival. That's what babies do, babies follow authority of parents, that's how they survive. They say in the first five-six years most neural connections are made, that means how ones gonna live their life is pretty much predictable. So in a way majority of humanity are just bigger babies, they just wanna survive so they go/follow where power/money/authority is.
This study was brought up in my class one day. A teacher of mine posed the question to the class, "How would someone feel if the student was placed in front of them? or if they were placed in a different room, with nothing to hear or see? Do you think their sense of conviction would be different?" Obviously, it would. It would be easier to carry out the task if you didn't hear their pain. "That's why nowadays, it's easier to fire guns or bombs from a long distance without being scarred by human conviction, as long as it's not you or something that affects you directly. With just a press of a button, you can inflict so much harm. Imagine missiles that governments can carry out with just a bark of an order, as long as they don't see or experience something directly, they will never know how horrifying it is," he continued. That really made me think.
"If my family had to endure psychological hardship then everyone has to also!" ~Stanley Milgram (probably) before unleashing some real borderline psychological torture sociological experiments on the world.
Today, one of the big traps is computers which are sold or perceived as "authorities". There are many cases today where people were affected by wrong decisions which were explained as "but the computer said so." Examples: A software identifies people by name and birth date. If there are two people with the same name and birthday, the software can't tell them apart, so some decisions will be mailed to the wrong person. Or an AI that suggests that police should patrol more in a certain area. This leads to more criminals being apprehended. But every police officer knows that you catch criminals on patrol anywhere in the city. Just last week, I read: "AI is neither artificial nor intelligent." All the data, the software and the hardware is all made and affected by humans. And it's not intelligent because it simply learns to respond to stimuli like Pavlov's dogs ... just without the dog. Therefore, Milgram is even relevant when it comes to "perfect" computers.
you are absolutely wrong about AI, AI is not feeding upon the data but the patterns, data goes as far as human intelligence, but the patterns goes till infinity, it is not just memorizing data, Todays LLM's have better reasoning then most adults and are infinitely smarter and knowledgeable then an avg joe, and just llike an avg joe they can learn things but orders or magnitude faster , it would have not been possible if it was not artificial or intelligent, also you are wrong about data, these models are fed data that has been cleaned thoroughly not just any random data, people literally get paid 6 figures to clean the data. what the police ai might be suggesting is criminals know where police is patroling they simply wont plan to do crime there, but if you intelligently randomize patrols, like read the patterns which criminals are using then do patrols there then more crime can be prevented, bcs why patrol tthe area where criminals dont plan to comit a crime
@@oksowhat LLM's don't understand anything they write. They are as "smart" as a random number generator with a bias towards 0.5. For example, they can only answer this riddle if they have seen it before with exactly those numbers: "Alias has three brothers and four sisters. How many sisters do the brothers of Alias have?" Try it with any LLM and with different values and you will see all kinds of mistakes. ChatGPT 4 answers "four" instead of the correct "five" since it doesn't understand that Alice is a person, female, and a sibling. I'm using LLM to write software. So far, my personal success rate is < 10%. Even simple questions with specialized LLMs contain bugs that make the answer unusable.
@@PhilmannDark indeed, but they are still in inception stage, better architectures will come within 15-20 yrs i belive devin like things will be common
Odd that I have read about this experiment many times before but the details hit differently this time. And while no one got hurt--at least not physically (certainly a lot of emotional trauma)--it still made me cry. People do not understand fully the things that influence their behavior. I have succumbed to peer pressure (groupthink/hive mind) when I was a kid but never to a point where it physically hurt anyone. Definitely emotionally. And vice versa. I have been hurt by groups of bullies both physically and emotionally. Cliques and social movements can sometimes harbor terrible people as much as they can harbor good.
You're right, this experiment makes us aware about so many things about how social environment and the presence of an authority makes us behave in a certain way. The results can be overwhelming.
I am really sorry for what you went through but here is something i found about the experiment. Milgram was not oblivious to the psychological needs of his participants and was aware of the potential harm caused by the study. Immediately after the study, its true purpose was revealed to the participants. They were interviewed and given questionnaires to check they were all right. A friendly reconciliation was also arranged with the ‘victim’ whom they thought they had shocked. This procedure, known as debriefing, is commonplace today, but this was not the case in the 1960s. So, in this respect at least, Milgram was ahead of the game in terms of ethics procedures (Blass, 2004). Milgram also conducted a follow-up survey of the participants one year after the study, to ensure that there was no long-term harm (Colman, 1987). The results showed that 84 per cent said they were ‘glad to have been in the experiment’, and only 1.3 per cent said they were very sorry to have taken part. Milgram also described how the participants had been examined by a psychiatrist who was unable to find a single participant who showed signs of long-term harm. Morris Braverman, a 39-year-old social worker, was one of the participants in Milgram’s experiment who continued to give shocks until the maximum was reached. He claimed, when interviewed a year after the experiment, that he had learned something of personal importance as a result of being in the experiment. His wife said, with reference to his willingness to obey orders, ‘You can call yourself an Eichmann’ (Milgram, 1974, p. 54). I started with the belief that every person who came to the laboratory was free to accept or to reject the dictates of authority. This view sustains a conception of human dignity insofar as it sees in each man a capacity for choosing his own behavior. (Milgram, 1964, p. 851
I wonder if the experiment comes up with such high results due to how many response prompts they had. For some reason, it felt like saying you didn't want to do it 4 times is a lot. People would pass a line where they thought, even subconsciously, that the conversation was circular; they do repeat most of the words each time. 2 prompts seem like a more natural "I don't want to do this." "Yes, I am sure I don't want to do this." type of thing. That may just be me though.
but isn't that the whole point? to determine if people would still hurt someone even if an "authority" was pressuring them? the way i interpret the experiment is to determine how many people would be willing to do the right thing even if they have to go against someone's orders. ideally, you would want the participants to say no even if you asked them 400 times. only asking once or twice removes the authoritative pressure, thus defeating the whole point of the test
@zilesis1 Where does the line stand between someone "pressuring" and someone lying and saying they had no other choice? I had to rewatch the video to make sure this wasn't dumb. Lol But, I do still feel the levels went a bit heavy. The results, I guess, speak for themselves as they were repeatable. But I would imagine people, in general, wouldn't know what to do at that moment if they were told, "You have no other choice; you have to continue." I also wonder if there were any lasting psych effects on the people who had made it to 450v.
I guess It can also be applicable through persuasion .like an authority can influence us to change our attitude and that attitude can produce a kind of behaviour that is against our former belief
We'd like to think of ourselves that we'd never do something like that, but at the end of the day we don't know it, unless we're in the mentioned position. Also I think it is only part of something which can drive people to awful deeds. Something which the nazis did was giving freedom to do awful things to certain authorities. Nearly everyone who had this freedom turned gradually into an absolute monster, because it led to a downward spiral of incrementally normalizing certain deeds, down to the point of rape, murder and torture. Would we be amongst the few who would remain reasonable? Or would be be amongst the majority? In our current state nearly no one thinks that he or she would do stuff like that, but history has shown that the majority of us would. And something which I think is also likely is that it's easier to shape younger men and women, but obviously we can't do experiments like that.
I think the world is chaotic enough that i dont need to pressure myself to follow the rules, yet i can be pressured through outside force to follow them.
I wonder when this study was performed. Modern people seem to be absolutely horrified and confused as to why the test subjects would even give one shock. maybe overtime we've learned to become more sympathetic, and learned to plca other people and ourselves over authority.
This experiment didn’t explain: Fear of being seen as outcasts is linked to Herd and Tribal instincts, and drives our subliminal priorities for unconscious yearning for safety. Also, Dr. Milgram didn’t know to focus on the subject of sensory shutdown correlated with cognitive and moral blind spots, and he did know of the counterpoint of Emotional/Sensory Reawakening, based on engaging with music and the arts, and the existential significance of that during current COUNTDOWN2045. Surprisingly, 300 years ago J.S.Bach was aware of his music to have the effect of antidote to sensory deactivation pressure. That is the reason why he defied dogmas for zombified music. But his strive was not followed and his music became the victim of the tradition, contrary to his lifelong battle with inner force of Herd instinct. Most of his music had been performed in mechanical way. That is why, his miniature masterpiece with the meaning of musical Parody remained obscured and unnoticed. But when it was played with no emotional withholding, it revealed what should be hard to miss - many dissonant sonorities that were banned from use by rules of his time, and yet he emboldened their sonic clashing impact with rhythmic emphasis and used them many times and in such way that reveals his approach of neuroscientist to his music almost three centuries prior to birth of this field… #BachSensoryDeactivationEffect
If I participated when I was religious, I would have “followed orders” for upwards of 300V. If I participated after developing my empathy, reading, and learning to speak truth to power, I would have resisted with some or complete success to not administer the electric shocks.
People who score high on agreeableness (trusting, empathic, friendly) are most likely to comply. The ones least likely to comply are those who score high on disagreeableness (antisocial, not trusting, stubborn)
I think, being against authority and rules and laws, that I would have refused even the first mild shock to the student. There's no way someone could force me doing what I don't agree on. But I would have liked to be in the experiment to test myself saying this...
What is the link between COVID and Stanley Milgram obedience? Give two lines There isn't a direct link between COVID and Stanley Milgram's obedience experiments. The COVID pandemic primarily relates to public health, while Milgram's work focused on social psychology and obedience to authority. ChatGPT ♥️♥️🌹🌹
There's a book by Robert Browning titled "Ordinary Men" which elaborates on this theme. It's about men in Nazi Germany who were enlisted to assist with the deportation of Jews into the ghettos. It's worth a read.
In December of 2020, I conducted my own little experiment, using local social media. I asked inhabitants of surrounding English villages, whether they favored people being forcibly vaccinated against the you-know-what. The Respondents were aware of their anonymity. Of the Respondents, 66% were in favor. I thought that accorded well with Milgram's early results.
I mean they almost certainly had the “no way this is actually real/happening” thoughts running through their heads. However, they also wouldn’t have known that they weren’t really shocking someone. The subjects couldn’t see the other person, they were given a shock themselves at the start, and the other person would scream and act as though it was real. And while they still couldn’t have been certain, I think the subjects showing signs of extreme anxiety suggests that they definitely at least thought that it could all be real.
I think if the effects were directly seen by the teacher the outcome would be different. Just role playing isn't the same as seeing the actual results of your actions.
Remember the Nazis and any other system like this like in many prisons or concentration camps around the world? I assume the eye barrier is just like a 5th question in this case but you can easily overcome it with peer pressure. Allow eye contact and add a actor "audience / judges" who put pressure on the person. Most people are just weak to stand up, even if there are no consequences for themselves.
Concentration camps were kept secret to the people of Germany. Out of sight, out of mind. If you don't see direct results of what your actions are doing, then you tend to go with authority. However, when pressed over and over, the vast majority of people break down to those making the rules.
A variation of the experiment was done where the students were in the immediate vicinity of the teacher and you're right, the results differed, but some participants still reached 450 volts
It mainly comes down to the will, ethics, and morals of the person. Some people will stop right away, while others will be pressured into following the leadership. I think the majority of people follow the path given to them by authority. It's harder for most people to choose the highest road.
16 years ago they did ask me questions and when I got it wrong they would shock me. I was 5 at the time and I always wondered why they did this to me. From USA. 14 years ago I got another shock experiment where if I got the memory game wrong I got a shock. Is the memory shock still the Milgram experiment?
"some of the participants would break out in fits of laughing..." This percentage of people is the part that nobody seems to want to understand or talk about: The percentage of ordinary people that are just waiting for an opportunity to joyously inflict suffering on a random victim. Sixty years after this became a classic psychology experiment this is still the elephant in the room people can't or won't talk about.
To my understanding of these reactions, it wasn't " joyous" fits of laughter. It was an involuntary nervous system response correlating to the anxiety the participants were going through. They were also exhibiting signs of anxiety through nail biting, excessive sweating, etc.
People will obey only to those superiors who had the power to inflict corresponding punishments on them if their orders are unfulfilled. Weak minded people who are scared to implicate this jobs have the higher chance to obey the gruesome order. Well, I am not the one at fault here. I'm just following orders. They thought. And only those principled person have possessed the. courage to vehemently say no on this said evil order at the risk of thier jobs....
@@sprouts well not always a clear choice But we always have some control over the actions we perform In a rare case that we don't have a choice, we won't feel regret after doing that thing(don't confuse regret with sorrow)
Now in real life, if the experimenter held a gun to the teacher's head and started to count down if he didn't shock the learner, very few would still argue they have a choice then.
The problem with preventing the incentive that leads to this outcome is that every state WANTS their citizens to blindly follow their orders. To stop the cycle we first need to find political leaders, who have spent their life pursuing power to voluntarily give that power away
This study shows why I don't like, when old people get arrested and to court, because they did minor things in the Nazi regime (like bookkeeping/ accounting in a KZ) There is just so little chance that anyone of this society hadn't done the same.
People have been conditioned to follow orders since they were in diapers. Police follow orders to commit crimes every day. People that do not follow orders are frowned upon. There are those that give orders and those that take orders. Think for yourself, refuse illegal orders, be your own person.
A BUNCH of the participants found out the real purpose of the Milgram study beforehand and decided to fuck with the study for fun. People within the research circle know this. This study needs to be disregarded.
This occurred prior to the Belmont Report and many of the federal protections that now exist in human subject research. The Code of Federal Regulations requires universities that receive federal funds and participates in research to have an IRB that reviews and approves these protocols. I wonder what the Yale IRB would decide if the researcher submitted this protocol today. Deception is allowed in research, of course. But how far is too far?
Creo que la gente es capaz de hacer cosas malas con tal de no cuestionar a una autoridad. He sido docente y ahora trabajo en el gobierno (en educación) y veo que mis compañeros son capaces de seguir órdenes aunque reconozcan que no son correctas. Yo siempre tengo problemas con acatar a las autoridades y hacer lo que piden solo porque tienen un puesto de poder. Pero es desgastante y cuesta mucho; lo más cómodo es hacer caso y porque en el fondo, creo, no tienen claros sus propios principios éticos; se dejan llevar, son del montón sin criterio que abunda en todo mundo.
If you are a true Muslim you wont agree to participate right from the beginning. Because even if they said you're not legally responsible, you know for sure that you'll be held accountable in the Day of Judgement in front of God, for inflicting harm on another person with no justified reason. And that you'll pay for it in the Hereafter, unless the other person forgives you. That's how the true religion,when followed precisely, prevents injustices.
This is also why religious considerations are taken into account. In any form of psychology, the psychologist is trained in different personal beliefs, and would never force someone to do something that is against their spiritual or religious background.
My takeaway is that we would all like to believe that we would never be able to deliver the shocks. And its easy to view the participants as being mentally weak. But these were normal people just like us. And although this study demonstrates this phenomenon in black and white, our leaders are using much more subtle and subversive tactics that may not be so easily recognizable as taking advantage of this psychological fault we have. Remember it wasn’t so long ago that we were isolating ourselves from churches, friends and loved ones, and taking experimental vaccines because the authority was telling us it was necessary. And in many cases being arrested for not obeying. I have no doubt we have not seen the end of this phenomenon.
Even tho by majority there is the obedience and scary blind orders done (I would join the minority of disobedience for said stuff) cuz of my moral code
Was Stanley milgram experiment on obedience was banned scientifically ? Say yes or no No. The Stanley Milgram experiment on obedience was not banned scientifically. ChatGPT ♥️🌹🌹♥️
Was Stanley milgram experiment on obedience was banned scientifically out of academia ? Say yes or no No. The Stanley Milgram experiment on obedience was not banned scientifically out of academia. ChatGPT ♥️♥️🌹🌹
You are a perfect example. They tell you this narrative and you regurgitate it at every chance. You do this in spite of looking foolish becuase most everyone has seen the actual footage.
And when the rich, senile, old, white, male socialist tells them that inflation is being caused by Putin and greedy profiteers and "supply chain issues" instead of Federal Reserve money printing and interest rate manipulation, the Democrat voters believe him.
Support us to make more video on the experiment at www.patreon.com/sprouts
By doing this experiment, Milgram actually taught us how to be aware of our evil and weaknesses, and at least, give me a chance to not follow orders blindly
Yes! Thanks for you comment Ray!
@@sprouts there's no such thing as good or evil, only gray areas
The experiment was to address the huge elephant in the living room. Not make the wild animal go back to its natural habitat.
That doesn't actually work though, repeats of the experiment with subjects that know about the experiment still had similar results. The relevant variable is not awareness of the experiment, it is the environment (that includes an authority figure). Awareness doesn't matter, only the inherently human response to authority does. It takes serious anti-authoritarian conditioning to even have a chance of refusing to follow the orders of the authority.
it depicts that humans don't have fixed personality. they are a mixture of who they are and where they are
One participant was an electrician, and cried and straight up left the room, refusing to inflict the harm he once endured.
No he never why are you lying
@@The-Progress-Projectlook it up num nuts
You skipped parts of the experiment. The subjects were diff ages (starting young, 18 yrs to older 35 yrs old). The older ones were prone to refuse to go all the way of the experiment and even quit (something around 30-40%, if not more) but the younger ones "blame" that the "authority" made them do it and they had no choice. This is why the Army is always looking to very young adults to have them join in, because they follow orders and think of consequences less. The Israelis army is a bit different, they give room to decision on the squad -- so it's a different psychological framework.
Except you go to jail if you don’t join the army in Israel
It's the same reason so many ideological fascist became teachers
I’m guessing the difference between the age groups was largely due to a sort of inherent authority that comes with greater age/seniority.
For example, a 20 year old subject would likely see the person conducting the experiment as a stronger source of authority than a 40 year old subject.
Thank you Aquel, you answered my question before I asked.
I guess the different "psychological framework" make them unanimously agree to kill innocent Palestinians. Not even sparing journalists, nurses or kids.
It takes a kind of interior stubborn-ness in order to stand up for what you believe in. You have to be the kind of person that values what they think about themselves more than what others think of them because the social pressure to go with the crowd can be very hard to ignore unless you are prepared to be disliked and to actively rock the boat and be a vocal minority when you see people doing something you consider wrong. That's step 1. Step 2 is you have to ignore the temptation to abuse power. That is a little easier if your have a strong moral code, however your mind can trick you into thinking you're doing something for moral reasons, when the reality is you're doing them for selfish ones. So you have to constantly second guess your motivations, look for your own bias, and where possible, defer some of your authority to others or at least allow them to critique your use of power so you can avoid falling into the trap of "I'm doing this for the greater good, not because I enjoy it (wrings hands together and starts drooling)"
I wonder if the results would have been different if the "student" had been in the room so that the "teacher" could see them. Would so many people have been able to go to 450 volts if they could see a human face? The mask mandates have me thinking about that.
Good point. You are right that seeing the misery inflicted might have reduced the acceptance of authority. But think of it this way: the regular people in society rarely actually witness the evil they ask their governments to do in their names. We merely vote, but the atrocities are committed out of our ear and eyeshot.
I still can be broken, especially when you add peer pressure and the consequence of loosing something. Remember the Nazis and any other system like this like in many prisons or concentration camps around the world or just any corrupt totalian systems or mafia structures. Once people are in the fear of loosing something like family, position, wealth is so painful, they prefer inflicting this pain to others to stay safe? I assume the eye barrier is just like a 5th question in this case but you can easily overcome it with peer pressure. Allow eye contact and add a actor "audience / judges" who put pressure on the person. Most people are just weak to stand up, even if there are no consequences for themselves.
You're right. The data shows that increasing the perceived distance to the "victim" makes it easier to be cruel (which is why we can't ignore a crying child on the street but easily can let thousands starve to death on another continent). That can happen by influencing how we think about other people (dehumanizing or demonizing "them", often used in racism), or by literally creating walls.
I would not comply to anything I didn’t understand and would refuse and walk out
That's why so many people eat meat
Thank you so much for publicizing this. The more people know about this, the better our future will be.
I remember the Milligram experiment, I witnessed a portion of it on TV and remember thinking at the time: 'What is wrong with these people, why don't they just refuse to continue?' I was just a child at the time but I remember it clearly. Looking back at my childhood I realise now that I had and still have a rebellious streak and a mind of my own that I refuse to hand over to any authority figure. I now witness with despair the sheep-like behaviour of my fellow man and woman. I'll leave you to guess my feelings about our current world-wide political and medical situation...
Thanks for adding this
Wow, you're so special. Surely only you think you're not the sheep.
Yes, I also am a bit different. But when we differ from society, we suffer due to maladaptive behaviours, and develop personality disorder. I have been formally and medically diagnosed with two of them.
But it is these different people who change the world, and turn it into a better place.
@@mayanksingla3244 I'm sorry. I was being sarcastic, just so you know. What I meant to say is that it's always the dumbest people who think they're not the sheeps and they are completely obvious to all the nuances so it's a thought that you should be putting to the test.
@@bananaforscale1283 yeah, I do agree.
Because normally a human lives under fear and anxiety, It's all about survival. That's what babies do, babies follow authority of parents, that's how they survive. They say in the first five-six years most neural connections are made, that means how ones gonna live their life is pretty much predictable. So in a way majority of humanity are just bigger babies, they just wanna survive so they go/follow where power/money/authority is.
Now I think about that
This study was brought up in my class one day. A teacher of mine posed the question to the class, "How would someone feel if the student was placed in front of them? or if they were placed in a different room, with nothing to hear or see? Do you think their sense of conviction would be different?" Obviously, it would. It would be easier to carry out the task if you didn't hear their pain. "That's why nowadays, it's easier to fire guns or bombs from a long distance without being scarred by human conviction, as long as it's not you or something that affects you directly. With just a press of a button, you can inflict so much harm. Imagine missiles that governments can carry out with just a bark of an order, as long as they don't see or experience something directly, they will never know how horrifying it is," he continued. That really made me think.
"If my family had to endure psychological hardship then everyone has to also!"
~Stanley Milgram (probably) before unleashing some real borderline psychological torture sociological experiments on the world.
Apparently, 99% of the subjects were not negatively affected by the experiment
Today, one of the big traps is computers which are sold or perceived as "authorities". There are many cases today where people were affected by wrong decisions which were explained as "but the computer said so." Examples: A software identifies people by name and birth date. If there are two people with the same name and birthday, the software can't tell them apart, so some decisions will be mailed to the wrong person. Or an AI that suggests that police should patrol more in a certain area. This leads to more criminals being apprehended. But every police officer knows that you catch criminals on patrol anywhere in the city.
Just last week, I read: "AI is neither artificial nor intelligent." All the data, the software and the hardware is all made and affected by humans. And it's not intelligent because it simply learns to respond to stimuli like Pavlov's dogs ... just without the dog.
Therefore, Milgram is even relevant when it comes to "perfect" computers.
you are absolutely wrong about AI, AI is not feeding upon the data but the patterns, data goes as far as human intelligence, but the patterns goes till infinity, it is not just memorizing data, Todays LLM's have better reasoning then most adults and are infinitely smarter and knowledgeable then an avg joe, and just llike an avg joe they can learn things but orders or magnitude faster , it would have not been possible if it was not artificial or intelligent, also you are wrong about data, these models are fed data that has been cleaned thoroughly not just any random data, people literally get paid 6 figures to clean the data.
what the police ai might be suggesting is criminals know where police is patroling they simply wont plan to do crime there, but if you intelligently randomize patrols, like read the patterns which criminals are using then do patrols there then more crime can be prevented, bcs why patrol tthe area where criminals dont plan to comit a crime
@@oksowhat LLM's don't understand anything they write. They are as "smart" as a random number generator with a bias towards 0.5. For example, they can only answer this riddle if they have seen it before with exactly those numbers: "Alias has three brothers and four sisters. How many sisters do the brothers of Alias have?" Try it with any LLM and with different values and you will see all kinds of mistakes. ChatGPT 4 answers "four" instead of the correct "five" since it doesn't understand that Alice is a person, female, and a sibling. I'm using LLM to write software. So far, my personal success rate is < 10%. Even simple questions with specialized LLMs contain bugs that make the answer unusable.
@@PhilmannDark indeed, but they are still in inception stage, better architectures will come within 15-20 yrs i belive devin like things will be common
Odd that I have read about this experiment many times before but the details hit differently this time. And while no one got hurt--at least not physically (certainly a lot of emotional trauma)--it still made me cry. People do not understand fully the things that influence their behavior. I have succumbed to peer pressure (groupthink/hive mind) when I was a kid but never to a point where it physically hurt anyone. Definitely emotionally. And vice versa. I have been hurt by groups of bullies both physically and emotionally. Cliques and social movements can sometimes harbor terrible people as much as they can harbor good.
You're right, this experiment makes us aware about so many things about how social environment and the presence of an authority makes us behave in a certain way. The results can be overwhelming.
I am really sorry for what you went through but here is something i found about the experiment.
Milgram was not oblivious to the psychological needs
of his participants and was aware of the potential harm caused by the
study. Immediately after the study, its true purpose was revealed to the
participants. They were interviewed and given questionnaires to check
they were all right. A friendly reconciliation was also arranged with the
‘victim’ whom they thought they had shocked. This procedure, known
as debriefing, is commonplace today, but this was not the case in
the 1960s. So, in this respect at least, Milgram was ahead of the game in
terms of ethics procedures (Blass, 2004).
Milgram also conducted a follow-up survey of the participants one year
after the study, to ensure that there was no long-term harm
(Colman, 1987). The results showed that 84 per cent said they were
‘glad to have been in the experiment’, and only 1.3 per cent said they
were very sorry to have taken part. Milgram also described how the
participants had been examined by a psychiatrist who was unable to find
a single participant who showed signs of long-term harm. Morris
Braverman, a 39-year-old social worker, was one of the participants in
Milgram’s experiment who continued to give shocks until the maximum
was reached. He claimed, when interviewed a year after the experiment,
that he had learned something of personal importance as a result of
being in the experiment. His wife said, with reference to his willingness
to obey orders, ‘You can call yourself an Eichmann’ (Milgram, 1974,
p. 54).
I started with the belief that every person who came to the
laboratory was free to accept or to reject the dictates of authority.
This view sustains a conception of human dignity insofar as it sees
in each man a capacity for choosing his own behavior.
(Milgram, 1964, p. 851
Still. Wondering. Can he figure out addictive. To. Alcoholism.
I wonder if the experiment comes up with such high results due to how many response prompts they had. For some reason, it felt like saying you didn't want to do it 4 times is a lot. People would pass a line where they thought, even subconsciously, that the conversation was circular; they do repeat most of the words each time. 2 prompts seem like a more natural "I don't want to do this." "Yes, I am sure I don't want to do this." type of thing. That may just be me though.
Good point
but isn't that the whole point? to determine if people would still hurt someone even if an "authority" was pressuring them? the way i interpret the experiment is to determine how many people would be willing to do the right thing even if they have to go against someone's orders. ideally, you would want the participants to say no even if you asked them 400 times. only asking once or twice removes the authoritative pressure, thus defeating the whole point of the test
@zilesis1 Where does the line stand between someone "pressuring" and someone lying and saying they had no other choice? I had to rewatch the video to make sure this wasn't dumb. Lol But, I do still feel the levels went a bit heavy. The results, I guess, speak for themselves as they were repeatable. But I would imagine people, in general, wouldn't know what to do at that moment if they were told, "You have no other choice; you have to continue." I also wonder if there were any lasting psych effects on the people who had made it to 450v.
I guess It can also be applicable through persuasion .like an authority can influence us to change our attitude and that attitude can produce a kind of behaviour that is against our former belief
This reminds me of what we did during the Covid pandemic.
Well this Channel is mind blowing !! Bring many more Experiments lessons. 🙏
We will
In my experience, the people who claim most loudly that they would not follow an unethical order are always the first to do so.
It's when we think we're so great that we don't need to question ourselves that we become capable of the most horrible things
MILGRAM? LIKE THE MUSIC PROJECT BY DECO 27?
IF U READ THE MANGA, THEY ACTUALLY MENTION THIS EXPERIMENT THERE!!
Milgram is an under appreciated hero
Would love to see more social psychology videos!!
Noted
I imagine this experiment today would show us how people are way more sadistic and keep obeying mean orders.
After an exhausting day at school this is all you need to cheer up ☺️
We'd like to think of ourselves that we'd never do something like that, but at the end of the day we don't know it, unless we're in the mentioned position.
Also I think it is only part of something which can drive people to awful deeds. Something which the nazis did was giving freedom to do awful things to certain authorities. Nearly everyone who had this freedom turned gradually into an absolute monster, because it led to a downward spiral of incrementally normalizing certain deeds, down to the point of rape, murder and torture. Would we be amongst the few who would remain reasonable? Or would be be amongst the majority?
In our current state nearly no one thinks that he or she would do stuff like that, but history has shown that the majority of us would.
And something which I think is also likely is that it's easier to shape younger men and women, but obviously we can't do experiments like that.
Clearly, Milgram was never in the military, where pain compliance, bullying and coercion is a way of life.
I think the world is chaotic enough that i dont need to pressure myself to follow the rules, yet i can be pressured through outside force to follow them.
You can actually watch this experiment been done on youtube!
I wonder when this study was performed. Modern people seem to be absolutely horrified and confused as to why the test subjects would even give one shock. maybe overtime we've learned to become more sympathetic, and learned to plca other people and ourselves over authority.
1961
Yes self-awareness works!
This experiment didn’t explain: Fear of being seen as outcasts is linked to Herd and Tribal instincts, and drives our subliminal priorities for unconscious yearning for safety. Also, Dr. Milgram didn’t know to focus on the subject of sensory shutdown correlated with cognitive and moral blind spots, and he did know of the counterpoint of Emotional/Sensory Reawakening, based on engaging with music and the arts, and the existential significance of that during current COUNTDOWN2045.
Surprisingly, 300 years ago J.S.Bach was aware of his music to have the effect of antidote to sensory deactivation pressure. That is the reason why he defied dogmas for zombified music. But his strive was not followed and his music became the victim of the tradition, contrary to his lifelong battle with inner force of Herd instinct. Most of his music had been performed in mechanical way. That is why, his miniature masterpiece with the meaning of musical Parody remained obscured and unnoticed.
But when it was played with no emotional withholding, it revealed what should be hard to miss - many dissonant sonorities that were banned from use by rules of his time, and yet he emboldened their sonic clashing impact with rhythmic emphasis and used them many times and in such way that reveals his approach of neuroscientist to his music almost three centuries prior to birth of this field…
#BachSensoryDeactivationEffect
I wouldn't wait to hear the answers.
If I participated when I was religious, I would have “followed orders” for upwards of 300V.
If I participated after developing my empathy, reading, and learning to speak truth to power, I would have resisted with some or complete success to not administer the electric shocks.
People who score high on agreeableness (trusting, empathic, friendly) are most likely to comply. The ones least likely to comply are those who score high on disagreeableness (antisocial, not trusting, stubborn)
I never follow stupid and/or apparently illegal orders
I think, being against authority and rules and laws, that I would have refused even the first mild shock to the student. There's no way someone could force me doing what I don't agree on. But I would have liked to be in the experiment to test myself saying this...
What is the link between COVID and Stanley Milgram obedience? Give two lines
There isn't a direct link between COVID and Stanley Milgram's obedience experiments. The COVID pandemic primarily relates to public health, while Milgram's work focused on social psychology and obedience to authority.
ChatGPT ♥️♥️🌹🌹
Ако съм на възрастта на участвалите - хора на над 50 г. надали бих се съобразявал с някой младок "учител" дето ще ми казва да правя дивотии.
Excellent video
Thank you very much!
thanks , that remind me to question things that i doubt
So THIS is how we ended up with a vegetable for a president?! 🥦
Send Trump more money, Owen. Be a patriot.
what kills you isn't voltage it is amperage.
Electricity is brutal. If you strike aa certain set of nerves the pain can last to about 1 hour or more
There's a book by Robert Browning titled "Ordinary Men" which elaborates on this theme. It's about men in Nazi Germany who were enlisted to assist with the deportation of Jews into the ghettos. It's worth a read.
Can you make a video about the Cyranoids Experiment of Stanley Milgram?
Can u add it here? sprouts.featureupvote.com
When you're naive and not knowledgeable, you'll be easily swayed
wow. such a great intructional video.
In December of 2020, I conducted my own little experiment, using local social media. I asked inhabitants of surrounding English villages, whether they favored people being forcibly vaccinated against the you-know-what. The Respondents were aware of their anonymity. Of the Respondents, 66% were in favor.
I thought that accorded well with Milgram's early results.
Background music is hypnotizing
Would be great to see a video about the ‘thud experiment’ next! Love your work :)
Thanks
Added to our backlog. You can follow its progess on our website, look for new video script and leave a comment ;)
At least this is more humane than Stanford prison experiment!
Great work 🥳🥳🥳 Thank you 💜💜💜
Wouldn't it be possible to indirect experience of experiments on power and the environment through my case?
Could this be the reason behind increase in aggression among supporters of opposite parties in politics. 🤔
Good question.
None of them thought they were REALLY shocking someone
I mean they almost certainly had the “no way this is actually real/happening” thoughts running through their heads.
However, they also wouldn’t have known that they weren’t really shocking someone.
The subjects couldn’t see the other person, they were given a shock themselves at the start, and the other person would scream and act as though it was real.
And while they still couldn’t have been certain, I think the subjects showing signs of extreme anxiety suggests that they definitely at least thought that it could all be real.
who noticed when aynokoji said abt this experiment when Karuizawa was getting bullied.
That's why I looked this up
I think if the effects were directly seen by the teacher the outcome would be different.
Just role playing isn't the same as seeing the actual results of your actions.
Remember the Nazis and any other system like this like in many prisons or concentration camps around the world? I assume the eye barrier is just like a 5th question in this case but you can easily overcome it with peer pressure. Allow eye contact and add a actor "audience / judges" who put pressure on the person. Most people are just weak to stand up, even if there are no consequences for themselves.
Concentration camps were kept secret to the people of Germany. Out of sight, out of mind. If you don't see direct results of what your actions are doing, then you tend to go with authority. However, when pressed over and over, the vast majority of people break down to those making the rules.
A variation of the experiment was done where the students were in the immediate vicinity of the teacher and you're right, the results differed, but some participants still reached 450 volts
It mainly comes down to the will, ethics, and morals of the person. Some people will stop right away, while others will be pressured into following the leadership. I think the majority of people follow the path given to them by authority. It's harder for most people to choose the highest road.
Yet it's still not taught to children in school not to do it and follow a moral code
We should spotlight on the authorities and explain the evil nature to the world so that we can avoid creating horrible dictator like Hitler @psycho
16 years ago they did ask me questions and when I got it wrong they would shock me. I was 5 at the time and I always wondered why they did this to me. From USA.
14 years ago I got another shock experiment where if I got the memory game wrong I got a shock. Is the memory shock still the Milgram experiment?
Could’ve just made a video on the US army and it would’ve sufficed
"some of the participants would break out in fits of laughing..." This percentage of people is the part that nobody seems to want to understand or talk about: The percentage of ordinary people that are just waiting for an opportunity to joyously inflict suffering on a random victim. Sixty years after this became a classic psychology experiment this is still the elephant in the room people can't or won't talk about.
To my understanding of these reactions, it wasn't " joyous" fits of laughter. It was an involuntary nervous system response correlating to the anxiety the participants were going through. They were also exhibiting signs of anxiety through nail biting, excessive sweating, etc.
People will obey only to those superiors who had the power to inflict corresponding punishments on them if their orders are unfulfilled.
Weak minded people who are scared to implicate this jobs have the higher chance to obey the gruesome order. Well, I am not the one at fault here. I'm just following orders. They thought.
And only those principled person have possessed the. courage to vehemently say no on this said evil order at the risk of thier jobs....
Wow, evil has no bounds.
We always have a Choice
Always?
@@sprouts well not always a clear choice
But we always have some control over the actions we perform
In a rare case that we don't have a choice, we won't feel regret after doing that thing(don't confuse regret with sorrow)
@@sprouts killing the master or sacrificing own life in that process is a last choice
Now in real life, if the experimenter held a gun to the teacher's head and started to count down if he didn't shock the learner, very few would still argue they have a choice then.
@@Yogi-sq4oj though one O_O
The pandemic and how we treated each other (dehumanized and marginalized) because of what authority figures told us is a modern example.
Unfortunately it is true.
@@sprouts I think what stands out is how people today think of the past and think it can't happen to modern people. I live in Canada, and it's sad
The problem with preventing the incentive that leads to this outcome is that every state WANTS their citizens to blindly follow their orders. To stop the cycle we first need to find political leaders, who have spent their life pursuing power to voluntarily give that power away
That's a powerful line!
This is a great example of why I don't trust the medical community. I think 65% in this case is a conservative figure.
This study shows why I don't like, when old people get arrested and to court, because they did minor things in the Nazi regime (like bookkeeping/ accounting in a KZ)
There is just so little chance that anyone of this society hadn't done the same.
Thanks
C19 proved nothing has improved with human's since Milgram's his report.
Isn't this the same thing that our schools and jobs do to us?
The experiment was deemed unethical? Did it upset the unethical people that pulled the near fatal lever? Oh dear, can't have that.
Most who watch this somehow eliminate themselves from the 98% that would deliver potentially lethal injury simply to comply with authority. Hubris.
People have been conditioned to follow orders since they were in diapers.
Police follow orders to commit crimes every day.
People that do not follow orders are frowned upon.
There are those that give orders and those that take orders.
Think for yourself, refuse illegal orders, be your own person.
A BUNCH of the participants found out the real purpose of the Milgram study beforehand and decided to fuck with the study for fun. People within the research circle know this. This study needs to be disregarded.
This occurred prior to the Belmont Report and many of the federal protections that now exist in human subject research. The Code of Federal Regulations requires universities that receive federal funds and participates in research to have an IRB that reviews and approves these protocols. I wonder what the Yale IRB would decide if the researcher submitted this protocol today. Deception is allowed in research, of course. But how far is too far?
Thanks for the insights
Creo que la gente es capaz de hacer cosas malas con tal de no cuestionar a una autoridad. He sido docente y ahora trabajo en el gobierno (en educación) y veo que mis compañeros son capaces de seguir órdenes aunque reconozcan que no son correctas. Yo siempre tengo problemas con acatar a las autoridades y hacer lo que piden solo porque tienen un puesto de poder. Pero es desgastante y cuesta mucho; lo más cómodo es hacer caso y porque en el fondo, creo, no tienen claros sus propios principios éticos; se dejan llevar, son del montón sin criterio que abunda en todo mundo.
An interesting experiment:)
Very!
question
defeat or heal
Look at how people lined up for the therapy and sacrificed their children to experimental procedures because they were told they had to.
Agree
We all have evil in us. We just need is two things. Lack of or believe of not being punished. Second, a catalyst.
I would gladly start with 450 volts
If you are a true Muslim you wont agree to participate right from the beginning. Because even if they said you're not legally responsible, you know for sure that you'll be held accountable in the Day of Judgement in front of God, for inflicting harm on another person with no justified reason. And that you'll pay for it in the Hereafter, unless the other person forgives you.
That's how the true religion,when followed precisely, prevents injustices.
This is also why religious considerations are taken into account. In any form of psychology, the psychologist is trained in different personal beliefs, and would never force someone to do something that is against their spiritual or religious background.
This experiment is flawed to begin with, live subjects should be in the same room, its like a sniper hitting a target at 1000 miles.
My takeaway is that we would all like to believe that we would never be able to deliver the shocks. And its easy to view the participants as being mentally weak. But these were normal people just like us. And although this study demonstrates this phenomenon in black and white, our leaders are using much more subtle and subversive tactics that may not be so easily recognizable as taking advantage of this psychological fault we have. Remember it wasn’t so long ago that we were isolating ourselves from churches, friends and loved ones, and taking experimental vaccines because the authority was telling us it was necessary. And in many cases being arrested for not obeying. I have no doubt we have not seen the end of this phenomenon.
Even tho by majority there is the obedience and scary blind orders done (I would join the minority of disobedience for said stuff) cuz of my moral code
Was Stanley milgram experiment on obedience was banned scientifically ? Say yes or no
No. The Stanley Milgram experiment on obedience was not banned scientifically.
ChatGPT ♥️🌹🌹♥️
If I participated in this experiment, and they asked me to administer an electric shock, I would have gotten up and left.
a human can survive a lot more than 450v we can survive 5 million kilovolts its just the amperes
Was Stanley milgram experiment on obedience was banned scientifically out of academia ? Say yes or no
No. The Stanley Milgram experiment on obedience was not banned scientifically out of academia.
ChatGPT ♥️♥️🌹🌹
Perfect video after convid-1984.
Hi
This is a deltarune reference
Covid behaviour
Exactly! That was the first thing I thought of. Normally good parents are sacrificing their children to a scientific experiment.
Vaccines save lives. Keep smoking your horse wormer in a crack pipe👍
i posit that the people “throwing the switch” had no Biblical knowledge morality or an entirely extremely twisted belief of what Scripture says.
Doesn't this remind you of mainstream media?
The Elite knows that and applied recently with their co.vid 19
This is oversimplified to the point of being deceptive. Milgram's research was not just unethical but very flawed. Do some research.
covid19 guys
When the Orange Cheeto tells them to storm the Capitol, they oblige.
You are a perfect example. They tell you this narrative and you regurgitate it at every chance. You do this in spite of looking foolish becuase most everyone has seen the actual footage.
And when the rich, senile, old, white, male socialist tells them that inflation is being caused by Putin and greedy profiteers and "supply chain issues" instead of Federal Reserve money printing and interest rate manipulation, the Democrat voters believe him.
@@workinprogress3609 Send Trump more money! Save the election! Be a patriot!