Polish team re-creates Milgram experiment with similar depressing results

[Anti Federalist]

When it comes to anything else, ethics, morality, sexual perversions, "moderns" are so very quick to toss aside conventional norms.

Except this.



Conducting the Milgram Experiment in Poland, Psychologists Show People Still Obey

http://www.spsp.org/news-center/press-releases/milgram-poland-obey

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

A replication of one of the most widely known obedience studies, the Stanley Milgram experiment, shows that even today, people are still willing to harm others in pursuit of obeying authority.

The title is direct, “Would you deliver an electric shock in 2015?” and the answer, according to the results of this replication study, is yes. Social psychologists from SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities in Poland replicated a modern version of the Milgram experiment and found results similar to studies conducted 50 years earlier.

“Our objective was to examine how high a level of obedience we would encounter among residents of Poland,” write the authors. “It should be emphasized that tests in the Milgram paradigm have never been conducted in Central Europe. The unique history of the countries in the region made the issue of obedience towards authority seem exceptionally interesting to us.”

For those unfamiliar with the Milgram experiment, it tested people’s willingness to deliverer electric shocks to another person when encouraged by an experimenter. While no shocks were actually delivered in any of the experiments, the participants believed them to be real. The Milgram experiments demonstrated that under certain conditions of pressure from authority, people are willing to carry out commands even when it may harm someone else.

“Upon learning about Milgram's experiments, a vast majority of people claim that ‘I would never behave in such a manner,’ says Tomasz Grzyb, a social psychologist involved in the research. “Our study has, yet again, illustrated the tremendous power of the situation the subjects are confronted with and how easily they can agree to things which they find unpleasant.”

While ethical considerations prevented a full replication of the experiments, researchers created a similar set-up with lower “shock” levels to test the level of obedience of participants.

The researchers recruited 80 participants (40 men and 40 women), with an age range from 18 to 69, for the study. Participants had up to 10 buttons to press, each a higher “shock” level. The results show that the level of participants’ obedience towards instructions is similarly high to that of the original Milgram studies.

They found that 90% of the people were willing to go to the highest level in the experiment. In terms of differences between peoples willingness to deliver shock to a man versus a woman, “It is worth remarking,” write the authors, “that although the number of people refusing to carry out the commands of the experimenter was three times greater when the student [the person receiving the "shock"] was a woman, the small sample size does not allow us to draw strong conclusions.”

In terms of how society has changed, Grzyb notes, “half a century after Milgram's original research into obedience to authority, a striking majority of subjects are still willing to 'electrocute' a helpless individual.”

[Origanalist]

I read this earlier. Humans suck.

[phill4paul]

Not surprised.

[timosman]

I read this earlier. Humans suck.

Well, at least the ones we elect are not as bad.:cool:

[otherone]

I read this earlier. Humans suck.

The state would not exist if people chose compassion over obedience. It's in the DNA.

[Occam's Banana]

And this goes here ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NcLNoxiPBk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NcLNoxiPBk


We've all heard of the "chain of command." Usually, people think of the term in the context of military, corporate and government power structures. But in reality, all of modern society is implicated. The "chain of command" sounds powerful - and it imbues the officers, the bureaucrats and the petty dictators of the world with a sense of importance and rank. The term is deceptive and behind it is an open secret hiding in plain sight.

Power does not flow from the person who administers orders. Command is inconsequential if it's ignored - or laughed at. Obedience is the real foundation for misplaced power. It is, in fact, the "chain of obedience," not the "chain of command" - the cumulative force of cowardly and compliant citzenry - which allows evil men to take control.

Can you imagine how Napoleon Bonaparte would be treated today if he arrived in Times Square in New York and attempted to order a man put to death? Chances are, he would probably end up heavily medicated in a padded room by the end of the day, but for a few minutes, people would probably have a good laugh. Rightly so. Separated from those who have been trained to obey them, even the most bloody heads of state are hardly more dangerous than a pick-pocket or a mugger.

It may be true that we have a demented pack of inbred maniacs running the world right now. But they aren't the ones that I fear. I fear the conditioned masses, which would put me to death at the drop of a hat if the right order is given. I fear the herd of well-meaning idiots which believe that written law and authority is to be followed at all cost - even at the expense of self-evident morality. The death squads and the concentration camps of history were never staffed by rebels and dissidents. They were run by those who followed the rules.

The problem isn't the "chain of command" - the problem is the "chain of obedience."

[Gumba of Liberty]

When it comes to anything else, ethics, morality, sexual perversions, "moderns" are so very quick to toss aside conventional norms.

Except this.



Conducting the Milgram Experiment in Poland, Psychologists Show People Still Obey

http://www.spsp.org/news-center/press-releases/milgram-poland-obey

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

A replication of one of the most widely known obedience studies, the Stanley Milgram experiment, shows that even today, people are still willing to harm others in pursuit of obeying authority.

The title is direct, “Would you deliver an electric shock in 2015?” and the answer, according to the results of this replication study, is yes. Social psychologists from SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities in Poland replicated a modern version of the Milgram experiment and found results similar to studies conducted 50 years earlier.

“Our objective was to examine how high a level of obedience we would encounter among residents of Poland,” write the authors. “It should be emphasized that tests in the Milgram paradigm have never been conducted in Central Europe. The unique history of the countries in the region made the issue of obedience towards authority seem exceptionally interesting to us.”

For those unfamiliar with the Milgram experiment, it tested people’s willingness to deliverer electric shocks to another person when encouraged by an experimenter. While no shocks were actually delivered in any of the experiments, the participants believed them to be real. The Milgram experiments demonstrated that under certain conditions of pressure from authority, people are willing to carry out commands even when it may harm someone else.

“Upon learning about Milgram's experiments, a vast majority of people claim that ‘I would never behave in such a manner,’ says Tomasz Grzyb, a social psychologist involved in the research. “Our study has, yet again, illustrated the tremendous power of the situation the subjects are confronted with and how easily they can agree to things which they find unpleasant.”

While ethical considerations prevented a full replication of the experiments, researchers created a similar set-up with lower “shock” levels to test the level of obedience of participants.

The researchers recruited 80 participants (40 men and 40 women), with an age range from 18 to 69, for the study. Participants had up to 10 buttons to press, each a higher “shock” level. The results show that the level of participants’ obedience towards instructions is similarly high to that of the original Milgram studies.

They found that 90% of the people were willing to go to the highest level in the experiment. In terms of differences between peoples willingness to deliver shock to a man versus a woman, “It is worth remarking,” write the authors, “that although the number of people refusing to carry out the commands of the experimenter was three times greater when the student [the person receiving the "shock"] was a woman, the small sample size does not allow us to draw strong conclusions.”

In terms of how society has changed, Grzyb notes, “half a century after Milgram's original research into obedience to authority, a striking majority of subjects are still willing to 'electrocute' a helpless individual.”

I have taught on the subjects of both the Milgrim (Power of Authority Figures) and the Stanford Prision (Power of Role Play) Experiments in my Human Nature Class.

Truthfully, when initially viewed, these are experiments that reveal the evil/selfish nature of mankind. Many people walk away from these videos as pessimists, in the process, losing faith in humanity.

I look at things differently.

I see human beings as trusting, imaginative and good-willed (unlike Hobbes, I see people as smart enough to inherently know right from wrong). Only when abused by sociopaths (whether the sociopath is themselves, their neighbor, or the State) do humans produce misery and destruction.

Anytime you watch the Migrim Experiment, or anything like it, you realize that most of the participates are under tremendous stress. This stress is a signal that these individuals internally realize that they are doing something fundamentally wrong. They intrinsically know that they would not like to be electrocuted so it becomes difficult for them to continue when they place themselves in their victims shoes.

What we are witnessing in the Milgrim Expeirment is weakness. Our society is, intentionally or unintentionally, producing weak, depressed people who accept authority because they have no pride in themselves or their future. These people are uneducated, no doubt, but this is not an indictment of their human nature. They are mearly used and abused sheep that don't know any better and think they are doing the right thing.

I've never seen a war, insurrection, or massacre where anyone, going in to the battle, thought they were the bad guys. The danger of propaganda/fakenews is lethal. The Migrim Experiment - Poland Edition is just one more example.

[timosman]

I see human beings as trusting, imaginative and good-willed (unlike Hobbes, I see people as smart enough to inherently know right from wrong). Only when abused by sociopaths (whether the sociopath is themselves, their neighbor, or the State) do humans produce misery and destruction.

You could say only when they breathe.



Anytime you watch the Migrim Experiment, or anything like it, you realize that most of the participates are under tremendous stress. This stress is a signal that these individuals internally realize that they are doing something fundamentally wrong. They intrinsically know that they would not like to be electrocuted so it becomes difficult for them to continue when they place themselves in their victims shoes.

What we are witnessing in the Milgrim Expeirment is weakness. Our society is, intentionally or unintentionally, producing weak, depressed people who accept authority because they have no pride in themselves or their future. These people are uneducated, no doubt, but this is not an indictment of their human nature. They are mearly used and abused sheep that don't know any better and think they are doing the right thing.


This definitely makes me feel better about my fellow humans. They are not evil, they are just stupid. What difference does it make?:confused:

[Gumba of Liberty]

You could say only when they breathe.




This definitely makes me feel better about my fellow humans. They are not evil, they are just stupid. What difference does it make?:confused:

I'd take stupid over evil any day.

[merkelstan]

Evil? the 'social experiments' in Soviet Union, China, and now europe

[surf]

I read this earlier. Humans suck.
PANG theory in practice. governments tend to subscribe to this and teach this fallacy.

[H. E. Panqui]

I'd take stupid over evil any day.

...you have it in spades, republicrat!... ;)...[albeit not an evil republicrat]

[pcosmar]

I read this earlier. Humans suck.

authoritarians suck

[pcosmar]

I'd take stupid over evil any day.

I rely on them being both.

operational parameters being what they are

[TheTexan]

What we are witnessing in the Milgrim Expeirment is weakness. Our society is, intentionally or unintentionally, producing weak, depressed people who accept authority because they have no pride in themselves or their future. These people are uneducated, no doubt, but this is not an indictment of their human nature. They are mearly used and abused sheep that don't know any better and think they are doing the right thing.

Agreed, they weren't evil.

They were just following orders.

[r3volution 3.0]

I have taught on the subjects of both the Milgrim (Power of Authority Figures) and the Stanford Prision (Power of Role Play) Experiments in my Human Nature Class.

Truthfully, when initially viewed, these are experiments that reveal the evil/selfish nature of mankind. Many people walk away from these videos as pessimists, in the process, losing faith in humanity.

I look at things differently.

I see human beings as trusting, imaginative and good-willed (unlike Hobbes, I see people as smart enough to inherently know right from wrong). Only when abused by sociopaths (whether the sociopath is themselves, their neighbor, or the State) do humans produce misery and destruction.

Anytime you watch the Migrim Experiment, or anything like it, you realize that most of the participates are under tremendous stress. This stress is a signal that these individuals internally realize that they are doing something fundamentally wrong. They intrinsically know that they would not like to be electrocuted so it becomes difficult for them to continue when they place themselves in their victims shoes.

What we are witnessing in the Milgrim Expeirment is weakness. Our society is, intentionally or unintentionally, producing weak, depressed people who accept authority because they have no pride in themselves or their future. These people are uneducated, no doubt, but this is not an indictment of their human nature. They are mearly used and abused sheep that don't know any better and think they are doing the right thing.

I've never seen a war, insurrection, or massacre where anyone, going in to the battle, thought they were the bad guys. The danger of propaganda/fakenews is lethal. The Migrim Experiment - Poland Edition is just one more example.

Since people have always behaved this way, it can't just be our society, can it?

[Occam's Banana]

I read this earlier. Humans suck.


authoritarians suck

People who willingly obey authoritarians suck even more.

Without them, the authoritarians wouldn't have any power.

"Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces." -- Étienne de La Boétie, Discourse on Voluntary Servitude (https://mises.org/library/politics-obedience-discourse-voluntary-servitude)

[Origanalist]

People who willingly obey authoritarians suck even more.

Without them, the authoritarians wouldn't have any power.

"Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces." -- Étienne de La Boétie, Discourse on Voluntary Servitude (https://mises.org/library/politics-obedience-discourse-voluntary-servitude)

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Occam's Banana again.

[Brian4Liberty]

“Our study has, yet again, illustrated the tremendous power of the situation the subjects are confronted with and how easily they can agree to things which they find unpleasant.”

And now we have an experiment which confirms The Massie Zombie Hypothesis.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Since people have always behaved this way, it can't just be our society, can it?

Any society dominated by the state will destroy any/all resistance to the state's rule, both genetically and culturally, in order to weaken the people and solidify state dominance. The state promotes itself as the only true and rightful "Alpha" in society. Any free man who attempts to resist this is swiftly destroyed. The state repeats this process until they have a monopoly on authority and all checks and balances are abolished. The entire society becomes a totalitarian pyramid (hence the dollar bill) until it commits suicide or is conquered.

This is as opposed of a (classically) liberal society which encourages individuals to be their own Alphas. By claiming their rightful authority, free men create their own (voluntary) pyramids on a local level. By making free men independent alphas, they naturally become a threat to the state and any Caesar, Napoleon or Hitler (Trump?) trying to take power. This is the reason Baron Von Steuben was so upset with the American Patriots during the Revolutionary War. How dare these commoners have the audacity to question my orders, what rabble!

I call them free.

[r3volution 3.0]

Any society dominated by the state will destroy any/all resistance to the state's rule, both genetically and culturally, in order to weaken the people and solidify state dominance...

And how did the state emerge in the first place?

[Gumba of Liberty]

And how did the state emerge in the first place?

When: During the Agrucultural Revolution with the advent of "farmers". A group of people easy to find and susceptible to extortion (taxes).

Why: Some nefarious individuals realized that those who control the food (resources) control the masses.

How: Technology and intellectual capital developed by some was used to subjugate others.

[Swordsmyth]

When: During the Agrucultural Revolution with the advent of "farmers". A group of people easy to find and susceptible to extortion (taxes).

Why: Some nefarious individuals realized that those who control the food (resources) control the masses.

How: Technology and intellectual capital developed by some was used to subjugate others.

Or in some places the farmers banded together to provide for the common defense, sadly these states were usually conquered or infiltrated, but they held off what you described longer than anarchy/monarchy could.

[r3volution 3.0]

When: During the Agrucultural Revolution with the advent of "farmers". A group of people easy to find and susceptible to extortion (taxes).

Why: Some nefarious individuals realized that those who control the food (resources) control the masses.

How: Technology and intellectual capital developed by some was used to subjugate others.

Were the people initially subjugated by the first states already "weak, depressed people who accept authority"?

If so, how did they get that way (i.e. it can't be that the state made them that way)?

[Swordsmyth]

Were the people initially subjugated by the first states already "weak, depressed people who accept authority"?

If so, how did they get that way (i.e. it can't be that the state made them that way)?

Probably not, it is more likely that the conquerors beat them down until Stockholm Syndrome was achieved.

[r3volution 3.0]

Probably not, it is more likely that the conquerors beat them down until Stockholm Syndrome was achieved.

It follows, then, that the state doesn't require a "weak, depressed...etc" population to exist, correct?

[Gumba of Liberty]

Were the people initially subjugated by the first states already "weak, depressed people who accept authority"?

If so, how did they get that way (i.e. it can't be that the state made them that way)?

Why can't it? I just explained that the subjugated had less technology or skills (intellectual capital) than the state. Once subjugated, only the beta followers (whether genetic or culturally enforced) were allowed to survive/thrive. People like all animals are highly adaptable.

[Gumba of Liberty]

It follows, then, that the state doesn't require a "weak, depressed...etc" population to exist, correct?

The more weak and depressed the stronger the state becomes.

[Swordsmyth]

It follows, then, that the state doesn't require a "weak, depressed...etc" population to exist, correct?

No it does not. But bad states (most states) seek to create one.

[r3volution 3.0]

Why can't it?

You're asking me why can't the state have made people "weak, depressed...etc" before the state existed?


No it does not.

We just established that the first states emerged before people became "weak, depressed...etc"


The more weak and depressed the stronger the state becomes.

Sounds reasonable

But my interest is in the conditions for the emergence of the state.

...or, say, the reemergence, from within an anarcho-capitalist society.

Evidently, it is not required that the people be "weak, depressed...etc" The state can emerge even if they're not.

[Swordsmyth]

We just established that the first states emerged before people became "weak, depressed...etc"

All it takes is for a gang to conquer a weaker population, or for a population to organize to prevent that. Your point is?




But my interest is in the conditions for the emergence of the state.

...or, say, the reemergence, from within an anarcho-capitalist society.

See above.

[Gumba of Liberty]

All it takes is for a gang to conquer a weaker population, or for a population to organize to prevent that. Your point is?

Agreed, I thought we made this clear. The state kills off the strong, takes advantage of the weak and weakens them further.

Down the blue-pilled rabbit hole they go.

[Gumba of Liberty]

But my interest is in the conditions for the emergence of the state.

Evidently, it is not required that the people be "weak, depressed...etc" The state can emerge even if they're not.

Like I said previously, unequal distributions of technology and skills allowed conquers to will the state into being.

The way to fight against the state (or prevent the growth of the state) is to make sure that any tools (guns, drones, the Internet, etc) they can use, we can use.

Decentralize and make available both technology and skills (including the abolition copyrights) and watch the state crumble.

[r3volution 3.0]

All it takes is for a gang to conquer a weaker population, or for a population to organize to prevent that. Your point is?

That's exactly my point. Psychology (willingness to obey authority, etc) has little if anything to do with it. Everybody gets obedient with a gun in their face. The larger point I'm making is that ancaps are naive for thinking that the state can be kept at bay if only people are sufficiently freedom-loving, independent-minded, awakened, etc, as is frequently claimed.


The way to fight against the state (or prevent the growth of the state) is to make sure that any tools (guns, drones, the Internet, etc) they can use, we can use.

Decentralize and make available both technology and skills (including the abolition copyrights) and watch the state crumble.

In many times/places, state military technology was available to the civilian population; yet the state didn't crumble. The problem is that information alone does nothing. The farmers may know how to build muskets, and cannons, and ships-of-the-line, or whatever the military equipment of the day is, but if they don't have the resources to actually build them, that information is useless. Even given equal distribution of information, unequal distribution of wealth (and individual ability) allows for the emergence of the state.

[otherone]

Like I said previously, unequal distributions of technology and skills allowed conquers to will the state into being.

The way to fight against the state (or prevent the growth of the state) is to make sure that any tools (guns, drones, the Internet, etc) they can use, we can use.

Decentralize and make available both technology and skills (including the abolition copyrights) and watch the state crumble.

Sounds great.
The problem is, the state would not exist if the hoi polloi didn't want it.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Sounds great.
The problem is, the state would not exist if the hoi polloi didn't want it.

They only want it because they perceive it to be in their best interest. Not a very hard argument to refute if you speak sheep.

[Gumba of Liberty]

That's exactly my point. Psychology (willingness to obey authority, etc) has little if anything to do with it. Everybody gets obedient with a gun in their face. The larger point I'm making is that ancaps are naive for thinking that the state can be kept at bay if only people are sufficiently freedom-loving, independent-minded, awakened, etc, as is frequently claimed.

First, you must wake up. Second, you must gather tools. Third, you must learn skills. Forth, you must network with others who are doing the same.

It's all connected.

[otherone]

They only want it because they perceive it to be in their best interest. Not a very hard argument to refute if you speak sheep.

"Speaking sheep" and convincing people to advocate against their interests are two different things.

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-a-man-will-fight-harder-for-his-interests-than-for-his-rights-napoleon-bonaparte-3-13-07.jpg

[Gumba of Liberty]

"Speaking sheep" and convincing people to advocate against their interests are two different things.

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-a-man-will-fight-harder-for-his-interests-than-for-his-rights-napoleon-bonaparte-3-13-07.jpg

Oh I agree.

[otherone]

Oh I agree.

What about your, "not a hard argument", comment?

[Gumba of Liberty]

What about your, "not a hard argument", comment?

I always taylor my argument to the individual person I am conversing with but the the general point is as follows:

I agree that most individuals put their (perceived) interests ahead of their Rights. Whether (hedge fund) rich or (EBT) poor most people falsely believe that the privileges they receive from the state outweigh the benefits they would receive from exercising their Inalienable, Natural Rights.

I disagree.

State-sponsored privileges are artificial and unreliable. These privileges can be taken away at any time for any reason. Even if you gain major short-term benefits from these privileges you must remember that they will eventually disappear (whether in your lifetime or the next). I sleep well at night knowing that the most powerful men in the world have achieved their station in life artificially and that one day these privileges will disappear like all artificial constructs.

Whether you are at the top of the pyramid (Wall Street Welfare Queens) or the bottom (Bourbon Street Welfare Queens), if you want to improve yourself, protect yourself, and protect your family this is a terrible way to do it. Think French Revolution.

If we want real freedom and security we cannot rely on ever-changing and evolving state privileges to secure long-term safety and stability. We cannot continue to allow a (relatively) small group of men to define and manipulate our Rights or we will wake up without any (like the present). Instead of living in a world of artificial privileges and laws written by men, we need to establish a society that codifies Universal, Inalienable Laws of Nature discovered by men (which already exist). In this way, your greatest interests (in the long run) are your Natural Rights. Without your Rights secure, you will forever be at risk and anything you build or create in this world is subject to destruction, including your bloodlines.

Unless, of course, you believe that the state can and will maintain your privileged station (for yourself and your family) perpetually. Good luck with that.