This Learner Experiment is not the one I have thought was under discussion. I was thinking of the Stanford Prison Experiment, which was fraudulent. I apologize for my confusion.
I do appreciate the rational discussion of the narrator, who does mention some issues with the specific experiment, such as it's potential lack of relevance to society outside of the lab environment, or it's theatrical - staged - nature.
However, while it is actually impossible to deny that people can effect harm, even unto death, to other people, and even the nicest person, or Gandhi himself is capable of this, it is not always evil to commit such harm. The fact is that circumstances determine whether killing is murder, and some people need killing.
Additionally, I would not have participated in an experiment to deliver electric shocks to people. This is a demographic the experiment not only didn't measure, but that it deliberately excluded by only accounting data on folks that were willing to deliver electric shocks to begin with. It's deeply flawed as a result, and the narrator correctly notes that there is disagreement regarding the study in the discussion.
The truth that people are socialized and habituated to function within society does not obviate the other truth that people are sovereign, and cannot be forced to do anything. Fox's Book of Martyrs may be instructive, if grim reading, in support of this contention. It may be difficult to accept this fact, due to the difficulty of challenging our foundational beliefs, as the narrator mentioned, and is perhaps best stated by Twain, who observed it was easier to fool someone than to convince them they'd been fooled.
People are not all corrupt. It is a fallacy that many people nonetheless believe. Corrupt people do not want anyone to not be corrupted, and they lie as necessary to fool them as might gain strength of character from the incorruptibility of others to resist being corrupted.
I know it is not true because I have seen people refuse to bow to any threat or accept any bribe to do what they believe is wrong.
Finally, even people who were willing to participate in the study revealed they were only willing to comply to a degree. Many people, who must have believed the study was real, refused to continue to deliver electric shocks. Of those that did not refuse, it is impossible to ascertain how many knew the shocks weren't real, and the study was staged. Even corruption is limited, and 45% of the people stopped, meaning they made the difficult decision that they had been wrong and to stop.
The aphorism 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely' is false.
This Learner Experiment is not the one I have thought was under discussion. I was thinking of the Stanford Prison Experiment, which was fraudulent. I apologize for my confusion.
I do appreciate the rational discussion of the narrator, who does mention some issues with the specific experiment, such as it's potential lack of relevance to society outside of the lab environment, or it's theatrical - staged - nature.
However, while it is actually impossible to deny that people can effect harm, even unto death, to other people, and even the nicest person, or Gandhi himself is capable of this, it is not always evil to commit such harm. The fact is that circumstances determine whether killing is murder, and some people need killing.
Additionally, I would not have participated in an experiment to deliver electric shocks to people. This is a demographic the experiment not only didn't measure, but that it deliberately excluded by only accounting data on folks that were willing to deliver electric shocks to begin with. It's deeply flawed as a result, and the narrator correctly notes that there is disagreement regarding the study in the discussion.
The truth that people are socialized and habituated to function within society does not obviate the other truth that people are sovereign, and cannot be forced to do anything. Fox's Book of Martyrs may be instructive, if grim reading, in support of this contention. It may be difficult to accept this fact, due to the difficulty of challenging our foundational beliefs, as the narrator mentioned, and is perhaps best stated by Twain, who observed it was easier to fool someone than to convince them they'd been fooled.
People are not all corrupt. It is a fallacy that many people nonetheless believe. Corrupt people do not want anyone to not be corrupted, and they lie as necessary to fool them as might gain strength of character from the incorruptibility of others to resist being corrupted.
I know it is not true because I have seen people refuse to bow to any threat or accept any bribe to do what they believe is wrong.
Finally, even people who were willing to participate in the study revealed they were only willing to comply to a degree. Many people, who must have believed the study was real, refused to continue to deliver electric shocks. Of those that did not refuse, it is impossible to ascertain how many knew the shocks weren't real, and the study was staged. Even corruption is limited, and 45% of the people stopped, meaning they made the difficult decision that they had been wrong and to stop.
The aphorism 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely' is false.
However, this seems to be a precious minority.
Here's a real-world example,
100% THIS.
In 2 minutes,
Here's a real-world example,
This is why we must DEMAND HOLACRACY.
WE MUST REJECT FEUDAL HIERARCHY.