06-13-2005, 09:13 PM
The problem is that, since the shock experiments were not real, you would have to be careful what conclusions you draw from them. While the people in the experiment complied with the authority figures to an extreme extent, their judgment in doing so was actually right, because the authority figures actually were ethical, and nobody was actually being harmed in the experiment. Then it becomes impossible to draw any meaningful objective conclusions from the experiment, and any subjective conclusions would only be available to those who witnessed the entire process firsthand. The acting job of the "student" is relatively straightforward, but the acting job of the "authority figure" is a much more complex one , which could have huge results on the outcome of the experiment.
People are inclined to respect authority, although perhaps less now than at the time of the experiment. But people do judge authority figures, not only by what they are asked to do, but by their read on the person giving the orders. One of my first questions about the experiment would be how far the actor pretending to be shocked would go to try to stop the experiment. How much was that person being physically restrained, and was that person not just screaming and begging to stop but making clear physical attempts to escape the experiment?
People are inclined to respect authority, although perhaps less now than at the time of the experiment. But people do judge authority figures, not only by what they are asked to do, but by their read on the person giving the orders. One of my first questions about the experiment would be how far the actor pretending to be shocked would go to try to stop the experiment. How much was that person being physically restrained, and was that person not just screaming and begging to stop but making clear physical attempts to escape the experiment?