Impermeability Between the Line Good and Evil | Zeynep Eray | TEDxYouth@ALKEV
Transcriber: Hạnh Doãn Minh Reviewer: Annet Johnson Since birth, we are expected to make different choices and given different rights. In normal circumstances, we do things with our own free will. But in society these choices get classified as good and evil. We think they’re distinctly different from each other. But what happens when a good human being makes an evil choice? Does that still make him a good person? There are really good examples explaining this situation, starting with the Milgram experiment. During the 1960s, Stanley Milgram carried out an experiment that would become really controversial in social psychology. He wanted to investigate why innocent human beings make extraordinary choices under an authority figure. He also expected this experiment to give more content about the confessions that Nazi soldiers made. The soldiers claimed that they had no intention of doing those horrendous acts against captives and did it just because they were told to do so. Milgram asked volunteer participants to play the teacher role. Their task was to electric-shock the subject learners, whenever they answered a question incorrectly. The shock could be increased in time. Milgram also put an authority figure into the room, only to motivate and encourage the volunteer participants to do what they were told. Whenever the participants asked to stop the experiment and get concerned about the learner, the authority figure would say, “I’m responsible for what happens to the learner” or “The experiment requires me to continue.” Here’s the footage. (Video) Teacher: Gold, power, necklace, moon, pain. Answer, please. Are you all right? 405 volts, the answer is moon. Next one: heart, stone, head, bread, work. Answer, please. The answer is head, 420 volts. Next one: wet, night, grass, duck, cloth. The answer is duck, 435 volts. It says, danger, severe shock, there’s X’s on there. Authority: Continue, please. Teacher: 435 volts. Next one: gray, woman, soldier, dog, horse. Answer is woman, 450 volts. The teachers would increase the voltage of the electric shock drastically and at some point the subject learners would either leave the experiment or stop responding to the shock. What the teachers didn’t know was that the learners were actually students working for Milgram and for the whole experiment they were never hurt. The interesting part of it was that the testers never thought about the participants reaching the point where they could cause serious damage to the learner. 65% of the participants followed the instructions given and increased the voltage to the lethal level. That means they could have easily killed the learner. The major lesson here was that often what determines the way a human being acts isn’t about the person they are, it’s about the situation they find themselves to be in. And just like this study, Philip Zimbardo intended to do another one. (Video) Guard: Hey, I don’t want anybody laughing. [unintelligible] Prisoner: I got to go to a doctor, anything. Jesus Christ, I am burning up inside, don’t you know? Prisoner: I want out! I want out now! Narrator: I’ve never screamed so loud in my life. I’ve never been so upset in my life. It was an experience of being out of control. [unintelligible] Zimbardo and his colleagues came together to do this experiment, which was called Stanford Prison Experiment. The purpose of this study was to give an insight on how people adapt to the environment there. There were 21 male college students that were made sure are psychologically and physically healthy. They were split into two groups: prisoners and guards. Prisoners had to be in shackles, stripped, and made to stay naked in the cells. The guards wore uniforms and were given sunglasses so that the prisoners wouldn’t see their eyes. They were told not to commit any harm. They were only supposed to make them lack privacy, feel powerless, and bored. This oppressive and unbearable environment, led to a huge breakout in only a few hours. The guards started acting in very hostile ways towards the prisoners and that caused them to display rebellious behavior. The guards started to become more cruel and relentless as the prisoners started acting in extreme emotions. This experiment had to be called off after six days. To this day, the reason for the way the guards behaved in this experiment is still a big controversy. According to Zimbardo they experienced deindividuation, a term explaining a situation where an individual cannot be distinguished in a group. This person loses their awareness of identity and becomes an anonymous member of the group terror, leading them to transcend their morality because they no longer feel any responsibility for their obnoxious acts. These two experiments tell a lot about human nature. Even though their procedures were really different, the results were really similar. Milgram’s experiment showed us how an average person is ready to obey the authority without thinking of their morals, whereas Zimbardo’s experiment displayed how an average person conforms to the role they’re supposed to play. They both show a part of human nature that we don’t want to see, that we ignore. Although we all think that we have limits and morals, the power of the situation should never be underestimated. Proven by these experiments, in certain circumstances our way of thinking and behaving can change easily. We all like to think that we, as good people, have pure souls and intentions, but it's only true to some extent. Good and evil could actually blend into each other and that would define a human being. Contrary to the imaginary boundaries we draw, the line between good and evil is not impermeable. Thank you. (Applause)