so-called Stanford experiment but please stay tuned

[Jon Ford]

Michael-- the Milgram experiment is a little different from the Stanford 
experiment that was done by psychologist Phllip G.  Lombardo. He really did 
use Stanford students who took the roles of prison guards and prisoners 
arbitrarily. The "guards" wound up inflicting similar humiliations on the 
prisoners as at the Iraq prison. I read a big article on this in the SF 
Chronicle a week ago and have no reason to believe it is falsified. The 
Milgram experiminet involved inflicting increasingly higher doses of "pain" 
on people who were groaning and moaning as if they were in pain---but they 
were faking it.:

Jon


				A Simulation Study of the
Psychology of Imprisonment
Conducted at Stanford University

Welcome to the Stanford Prison Experiment web site, which features an 
extensive slide show and information about this classic psychology 
experiment, including parallels with the recent abuse of Iraqi prisoners. 
What happens when you put good people in an evil place? Does humanity win 
over evil, or does evil triumph? These are some of the questions we posed in 
this dramatic simulation of prison life conducted in the summer of 1971 at 
Stanford University.

How we went about testing these questions and what we found may astound you. 
Our planned two-week investigation into the psychology of prison life had to 
be ended prematurely after only six days because of what the situation was 
doing to the college students who participated. In only a few days, our 
guards became sadistic and our prisoners became depressed and showed signs 
of extreme stress. Please join me on a slide tour describing this experiment 
and uncovering what it tells us about the nature of Human Nature.

   --Philip G. Zimbardo


>From: "Michael Eisenstadt" <michaele@HotPOP.com>
>Reply-To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
>To: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
>Subject: Re: so-called Stanford experiment but please stay tuned
>Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 15:39:14 -0600
>
>yeah, the book was there and i got it.
>
>and whadduhya know? it seems i was right. its bogus
>and Milgram cooked the results, set it up so it would
>produce the data he was looking for.
>
>Stanford Univ students? No way. There is NO mention
>of any Stanford Experiment in the index.
>
>What it was was Milgram who was at Yale at this
>time advertised for New Haven townies offering $4.00
>an hour for his experiment. He handpicked the "prisoner"
>for his loser looks and dress (see photo below) referring
>to him as a "rotund accountant." He describes one of the
>hired jailors thus:
>
>"Fred Prozi, Unemployed (in Experiment 5)
>
>The subject is about fifty ears old, dressed in a jacket
>but no tie; he has a good-natured, if slightly dissolute,
>appearance. He employs working-class grammar and
>strikes one as a rather ordinary fellow."
>
>Milgram then intimidates the jailer into administering
>stronger and stronger electric shocks to the prisoner
>which elicit louder and louder shrieks and banging
>on the wall which, at a certain point, ominously cease.
>
>Then, following Milgram's oh so objective description of
>Mr. Prozi quoted above, there are 3 pages of transcribed
>conversation as Prozi gets tricked into continuing the
>fake torture despite his palpable reluctance to do so.
>
>Proving?  Proving nothing of course. Psychology is
>notorious for cooked experiments and the number of
>fakers interviewed on TV is astounding. See Richard
>Posner's very entertaining Public Intellectuals which
>is a close look at the most frequently seen 100
>speaking heads on TV and what they argue for and
>what their track record is on what they argued for the
>week or year before.
>
>I am not surprised that Frances took my doubting
>the likelihood of the legend as yet another example of
>my moral delinquencies. It's easier for her to put me
>down than to think through the possibility that what
>she so readily believed just ain't so (about the
>imaginary Stanford students torturing one another).
>
>
>Unsurprisingly the copy of Milgram's book is underlined
>throughout in colored ink and highlighted elsewhere
>in yellow. As i said, Milgram's argument is the kind
>that the unthoughtful automatically swallow down: for
>them it is so counterintuitive that it must be right
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
><< fake.jpg >>

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/