How Evil Are You?

[BENZOOKA]

It's impossible to know, at least for me, without being put in such a situation.

I'm very empathetic. But I also excel in military-type of efficiency and work well with authority.

 

[Kae]

Well if it's that exact same experiment, well I would probably identify it since I've heard of it way too many times, and I would probably walk out to look good, or just for laughs flip all of the switches on as soon as the experiment begins.
As for my responsiveness to authority, well I get annoyed when someone orders me to do something, and I'm not really one to do something other people tell me to do, but I'm afraid I cannot know what I would do in this situation, since I haven't been on it and a true response can only be told if said thing has already been experience, not to mention that just like everyone else my assumption is that I wouldn't, but you really never know until it's happened.

 

[x EvilErmine x]

I'd push it for a little while because it'd be funny, util the point the other guy starts sounding like he is genuinely in distress. Then I would refuse. This is why I would not do well in the armed forces. I believe that authority should not be blindly flowed without question, that kind of blind obedeance is what makes it possible for things like genocide and war crimes to happen.

 

[BreakfastMan]

You do know that the Milgram experiment was not about how evil someone was, but about social pressure, right?

Anyway... Hard to tell. Of course I want to say "No, I would not", but then so would everyone who participated in the experiment. Also, there is some interesting new research that also states it depends on what state of mind I am in, so might as well add that one too.

 

[bobmus]

I love explaining the Milgram experiment to people who have never heard of it. A fascinating experiment in the power of authority, and always good for ethical debates. Plays a big part when you discuss things like the Nazis etc.

 

[cap'nsillybollocks]

YOU VILL ANSER ZE KVESTIONS CORRECTLY!!! *Bzzzzt!*

 

[Yopaz]

I heard that only about 35% of people refuse to go through with it. But I bet if you polled it 90% would say they would be in that 35%.

Personally, whilst I like to think of myself as being a bastion of morality and integrity, I do tend to be cowed by authority, so I probably would do it, no doubt convincing myself that they knew what they were doing and wouldn't really let me hurt someone.

Well of course people think they wont go through with this. We see it from a distance and we see how horrible it is. If we were actually a part of this we wouldn't be able to distance ourselves from it in the same way and rather follow the instructions thinking that we were doing the right thing. If 90% believes they would be among the 35% it really just shows that we have no idea what it's really like. I want to believe I would be among the 35% because I am physically nauseated by causing pain to anyone and I hate following authorities mindlessly. However I can't say for sure. Really, this thing is a huge part of what's wrong with humanity and don't take this as misanthropic. We do these things because someone has told us to and we don't consider the consequences.

 

[tycho0042]

I think I would have stopped at 150 somewhere in my addled mind I seemed to have heard that voltage like that was unhealthy so I would have brought that up.

 

[Agayek]

Hence my rant on sensationalism *nods*

But you know, right now, I suspect pretty much everyone will say that there's no way they'd go all the way to the end, and would walk out of the room. Curiously, that's what the expected result of the experiment was. But, in reality, the result was...well...scarier.

This is pretty much the only proper answer.

I'd really like to think that as soon as I start hearing the guy on the other end complaining about actual pain, I'd punch the doctor in the face and walk out, but there's really no way to tell without actually being in that situation.

Anyone who can confidently state what they'd do in that situation without having been in a similar situation before is, quite simply, lying. This thread is mostly irrelevant because of that.

 

[The Funslinger]

Hey guys for uni I have to do an hour long presentation about social and moral development. A part of this presentation includes something called the Milgram Experiment. Test subjects had to administer electric shocks to another person whenever they got a question wrong with the voltage increasing every time. Below is a short video that explains what I am talking about.

Spoiler

Feel free to watch the entire episode if you wish.

My question to you guys is what do you think you would do in that situation? Would you continue the experiment or would you refuse to do so? I know most of this is only theoretical as in a real life situation you might chose something different to what you answer here.

Thanks for your help.

I'm studying Psychology as well.

I'd just like to say, the Milgram experiment wasn't meant to gauge any sort of moral evil. It's just meant to see how people are influenced by authority figures.

To answer your question, I'm a sociopath; albeit one with a set of morals. In general, I'd place the value of a life above some social experiment, and would probably tell the overseer to shove it.

 

[DanielBrown]

I reckon I would stop pretty quickly unless I met the other person and knew he wanted to be part of the experiment. If that was over with I'd keep going until he told me to stop.
Though, as already mentioned, it's hard to say how we'd react if we actually were in that situation.

What exactly does the switch-flipper think he's achieving with a test like that?

 

[Syzygy23]

Yeah, I have problems with authority in the first place. I firmly believe that I know what's best for me, and I know EXACTLY what my motives are at any given moment. Anyone who tries to order me to break my moral code can go screw themselves.

Along those same lines of logic, I don't believe I know whats best for anyone else either. Leading and following are things that can only work in the short term for me, even if any given leader doesn't order me to break my moral code(s).

 

[Rainforce]

I would probably do it for a few turns, then hesitating for a few seconds, free the victim and then search for the idiot who thought this stuff up AND PUT HIM IN THE FUCKING CHAIR AND CONTINUE : D

 

[Nargleblarg]

I'm not going to lie here like most of the people who see this and say that they're invulnerable from being tricked. As humans we can be easily deceived around really charismatic people especially when they are in positions of power.

If I were unaware of the situation/test being done like I'm sure those in the video were and if the "experts" were good actors which I'm sure they were as well then it's not unbelievable to see myself going along with it. In the back of everyone's mind in this experiment they expect the administrator is aware of the situation and trust them, and in any case the subject believes it would be the experts to blame for any complications.

Honestly to see the absolute best example of this just look at Hitler; the German people under him were not all mass murderers but once they accepted his leadership they began following orders that changed. They were not emotionless or stupid but just blindly trusted that he knew what he is doing like nearly 99% of all people would do in such a situation.

 

[DEAD34345]

As people have stated, I'm pretty sure this experiment originally had nothing to do with "evilness". Personally, I think I'd just keep flipping the switches, because the people being tested on wouldn't be there involuntarily. If they asked me to stop I would, and if I was told to continue anyway I'd start to become very suspicious of the experiment I was supposedly helping with.

Edit : as for morality . I personally think morality is a made up thing to make people feel good about themselves compared to other people . Morality is subjective, therefor it is different for every person , hence it doesn't truely exist . You do what you feel is right for no logical reason.

There's no logical reason to do anything, you can't objectively say any one outcome is "better" than any other. Acting according to a subjective morality is no less logical than acting selfishly, or any other possible way of acting. Personally, I try to act morally because helping others out makes me happier, probably due to a combination of built-in human instincts and societal conditioning.

 

[The_Waspman]

If the doctor could guarantee for me that Eli Roth was actually hooked up to the electrodes, I would do that shit all day. And I wouldn't start at the 20 volt mark either...

 

[Rheinmetall]

I wouldn't participate of course into such a reality show, and neither I would watch it. I find the whole idea of this Milgram experiment sick.

 

[krazykidd]

As people have stated, I'm pretty sure this experiment originally had nothing to do with "evilness". Personally, I think I'd just keep flipping the switches, because the people being tested on wouldn't be there involuntarily. If they asked me to stop I would, and if I was told to continue anyway I'd start to become very suspicious of the experiment I was supposedly helping with.

Edit : as for morality . I personally think morality is a made up thing to make people feel good about themselves compared to other people . Morality is subjective, therefor it is different for every person , hence it doesn't truely exist . You do what you feel is right for no logical reason.

There's no logical reason to do anything, you can't objectively say any one outcome is "better" than any other. Acting according to a subjective morality is no less logical than acting selfishly, or any other possible way of acting. Personally, I try to act morally because helping others out makes me happier, probably due to a combination of built-in human instincts and societal conditioning.

I disagree . Acting selfish is very logical . Looking out for yourself makes more sense than looking out for others . Because others can betray or hurt you .

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

Given my own attitude and the results of that particular experiment I think I'd end up going all the way to the point in which they would receive a lethal shock and end up dying. Though since it's about obedience I would be more inclined to tell them to just shove it; I just don't think it would be worth it.

Of my own accord I probably would, if I was told to then I wouldn't. Or so I like to think; I'm edgy you see.

 

[DEAD34345]

There's no logical reason to do anything, you can't objectively say any one outcome is "better" than any other. Acting according to a subjective morality is no less logical than acting selfishly, or any other possible way of acting. Personally, I try to act morally because helping others out makes me happier, probably due to a combination of built-in human instincts and societal conditioning.

I disagree . Acting selfish is very logical . Looking out for yourself makes more sense than looking out for others . Because others can betray or hurt you .

Logical in what way? Why exactly is it a bad thing if others betray or hurt you? Why care about harm done to yourself but not others? From a purely logical and objective point of view, there's no major difference between the two. Acting selfishly is certainly logical if you only care about yourself, but caring only for yourself is no more or less logical than caring about everyone, or caring about your friends and family, or even caring only for a particularly shiny penny you found on the street.