Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Power affects morality
The possibility of evil character traits
Limitations of social control in prisons
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Power affects morality
The Zimbardo study aimed to investigate how readily people will conform to the roles they are put in. Can good people go bad? Can bad people change their behavior? I believe human character plays an important role in deciding if an individual will choose to be evil or good, not power, or the roles they are put in. Just because someone is in a position of power doesn't necessarily bring the evil out in them. There are many people who are in power, but they also choose not to allow power to lead them into evil circumstances. I believe certain individuals use power as an excuse to portray what has been within them all along, evilness! For example, the guards at Abu Ghraib and the police brutality that occurs in our country right …show more content…
today. These individuals must have problems way before they were put in these situations. Those positions aided in supporting their negative feelings and their evil disposition. I do not believe conformity has anything to do with one's action towards another individual's life. The guards at Abu Ghraib and police officers, who commit police brutality, know right from wrong. They are not conforming into a given situation. They are using their position as an excuse to bring harm onto other individuals. When they take the oath, they already know what is expected of them. Why do harm to others, unless they are already harboring those types of feelings? When the Stanford experiment was being done, were the subjects coached on what to do?
Were the roles predetermined for both guards and prisoners by manipulation? Was the environment designed to encourage and require them to act in a certain way? Did the subjects feel the sense of being watched encouraged them to perform in a certain way? Did Zimbardo himself carry the power because he acted as the warden? Was the psychological test a key factor in choosing who would perform what, and how? Were the findings about a prison setting only or about life in general? If it was about prisoners and guards, I do not believe it would be that easy for individuals to conform so quickly unless they already harbored those types of feelings. If it was about life in general, history shows us that Hilter, David Koresh, Warren Jeffs, John Wayne Gacy, Jeffery Dahmer, Jim Jones and Charles Manson had evil within them way before they changed the lives of so many people in the worse way. I am sure some would say these individuals did have some position of power. Power? No! Manipulation? Yes. If someone is already dealing with aggressiveness, authoritarianism, narcissism, social dominance, diminished empathy, and antisocial behavior, being in a position of manipulation could give them the excuse or desire to feed off those negative
characteristics. According Zimbardo, good people can do bad things. Bad people can change their ways. According to Debbie Ford, we all have darkness that lies within us all and causes us to act in inappropriate ways. Within each of us a war rages between "the good self and the bad, the light and the dark, the id and the ego, the Jekyll and Hyde." If someone is unwilling to express their emotions such as hurt, hopelessness, sadness, anger, jealousy and hate, it could lead to self-destructive behavior. Other individuals have the power to work on those emotions. They prevent themselves from acting out, destroying relationships and sabotaging any future dreams they may have. I believe some individuals have a major challenge in expressing their authentic self. Will determining what mask to wear define whether to be evil or good in any given situation? No, your authentic self should define that. Not power, or conforming! Control over one's character should do that. I believe if you are an evil person, not matter what circumstances you are in, it will show. If you are a good person, you will not let bad circumstances lead you into doing evil things..
"Why can 't black people just work harder?" Hard work results in success, and black people are in many cases looked at as less successful than white people. Therefore, that means that black people simply work less hard than white people. This is the perspective that many privileged white people may have when discussing the issue of white privilege. They fail to realize that white privilege plays a significant role in what opportunities someone might have. In Princeton University student, Tal Fortgang 's essay, "Checking My Privilege: Character as the Basis of Privilege", he criticizes those who tell him to "Check your privilege". He argues that the phrase discredits his achievements, and that white privilege is not the reason that he became
He explores a multitude of concepts that revolves around the effects of situational factor on the behavior for an individual or group. In particular, a theory I wanted to explore is Zimbardo’s view on power and the impact of systematic structure. For instance, in Chapter 10, Zimbardo writes that “Power is a concern when people either have a lot of it and need to maintain it or when they have not much power and want to get more. However, power itself becomes a goal for many because of all the resources at the disposal of the powerful” (Zimbardo). In accordance to this view, power is desired by many, and often results in cases of struggles for power. In the instance of the Stanford Prison Experiment ,the struggle for power can be illustrated in the guard’s abusive behavior in order to establish and maintain power, and the prisoner’s rebellion as means to fight back against mistreatment. Beyond the scope of the experiment, an example of power can be seen in the monopoly of the pharmaceutical industry on the cost of prescription drugs. Many pharmaceutical companies create a monopoly on the basis of patent laws over specific drugs. Subsequently, these companies are able to set high prices in order to maximize profit margins. While this may be beneficial for the pharmaceutical industry, patients are
Twenty-four average men were entered into a fake prison setting, twelve of which who had been given the role of prisoner and twelve with the role of guard. Throughout the course of the experiment we see the environment effect negatively on the actions of the group of guards, clearly demonstrating that situational forces can force a person to cross the line between good and evil. We see this heavily embodied in the guard Dave Eshelman AKA ‘John Wayne’ – nicknamed by the prisoners in the study – the most brutal guard of them all, the one who demonstrated all the findings on the influence of power and authority and human behaviour. “I was kind of running my own experiment in there, by saying, “How far can I push these things and how much abuse will these people take before they say, ‘knock it off?'” But the other guards didn’t stop me.
Every participant came from a relatively good background, with a college education, a clean legal record, and strong community ties because Zimbardo hypothesized that a good person could perform evil acts if they were given the opportunity. In the Stanford Prison experiment, Zimbardo’s hypothesis was reflected very clearly. The guards did absolutely terrible things to the prisoners, but in the end, the guards were good people, the situation stimulated bad ideas and evil
In this study Zimbardo chose 21 participants from a pool of 75, all male college students, screened prior for mental illness, and paid $15 per day. He then gave roles. One being a prisoner and the other being a prison guard, there were 3 guards per 8 hour shift, and 9 total prisoners. Shortly after the prisoners were arrested from their homes they were taken to the local police station, booked, processed, given proper prison attire and issued numbers for identification. Before the study, Zimbardo concocted a prison setting in the basement of a Stanford building. It was as authentic as possible to the barred doors and plain white walls. The guards were also given proper guard attire minus guns. Shortly after starting the experiment the guards and prisoners starting naturally assuming their roles, Zimbardo had intended on the experiment lasting a fortnight. Within 36 hours one prisoner had to be released due to erratic behavior. This may have stemmed from the sadistic nature the guards had adopted rather quickly, dehumanizing the prisoners through verbal, physical, and mental abuse. The prisoners also assumed their own roles rather efficiently as well. They started to rat on the other prisoners, told stories to each other about the guards, and placated the orders from the guards. After deindividuaiton occurred from the prisoners it was not long the experiment completely broke down ethically. Zimbardo, who watched through cameras in an observation type room (warden), had to put an end to the experiment long before then he intended
Stanley Milgram conducted the experiment to put participants into immoral situations to obey an authority figure of some measure, and he tested their performance and willingness, to participate in acts that strayed away from their belief of right and wrong. Zimbardo conducted an experiment in some ways similar. He conducted an experiment to see if people would assume the expected normal roles of what a prisoner is expected to do and what an authority figure like a prisoner guard is supposed to do. So both Zimbardo and Milgram at this point are trying to prove that authority and the social norm of how authorities should act generates psychological effects on their performance, as well as people who are expected to be below and obey an upper hand.
Subjects became so entranced in these roles that the guards started to behave as if they really were the guards of a true prison. Zimbardo had told them to think of themselves in this way and it led to the guards mentally abusing the prisoners with their cruel and degrading ro...
Subjects became so entranced in these roles that the guards started to behave as if they really were the guards of a true prison. Zimbardo had told them to think of themselves in this way and it led to the guards mentally abusing the prisoners with their cruel and degrading routines. In Romesh Ra...
When put into the position of complete authority over others people will show their true colors. I think that most people would like to think that they would be fair, ethical superiors. I know I would, but learning about the Stanford Prison Experiment has made me question what would really happen if I was there. Would I be the submissive prisoner, the sadistic guard, or would I stay true to myself? As Phillip Zimbardo gave the guards their whistles and billy clubs they drastically changed without even realizing it. In order to further understand the Stanford Prison experiment I learned how the experiment was conducted, thought about the ethical quality of this experiment, and why I think it panned out how it did.
Police brutality may occur violating the rights and liberties of any individual at any given time. How...
It explains how can good people become perpetrators of evil and commit dreadful crimes. In the book, Zimbardo highlighted three psychological truth. First is that the world full with both evil and good, the barrier between the two is absorbent, and angels and devils can switch. Zimbardo claims that the one easily switch from someone good to someone who can hardly recognize himself or herself. He suggest that the one must be watchful and be stronger that the circumstances. In military and especially during war, the have no time to watch himself and see the person that they are turning to because they think that this is their job and it is orders that they can not disobey. Zimbardo utter that when the one is believed that others will be responsible for his or her actions, the one believe that they can act incognito and thinking that they people who are suffering are not as important. According to Zimbardo the conditions of the situation is what influence personal
When put into an authoritative position over others, is it possible to claim that with this new power individual(s) would be fair and ethical or could it be said that ones true colors would show? A group of researchers, headed by Stanford University psychologist Philip G. Zimbardo, designed and executed an unusual experiment that used a mock prison setting, with college students role-playing either as prisoners or guards to test the power of the social situation to determine psychological effects and behavior (1971). The experiment simulated a real life scenario of William Golding’s novel, “Lord of the Flies” showing a decay and failure of traditional rules and morals; distracting exactly how people should behave toward one another. This research, known more commonly now as the Stanford prison experiment, has become a classic demonstration of situational power to influence individualistic perspectives, ethics, and behavior. Later it is discovered that the results presented from the research became so extreme, instantaneous and unanticipated were the transformations of character in many of the subjects that this study, planned originally to last two-weeks, had to be discontinued by the sixth day. The results of this experiment were far more cataclysmic and startling than anyone involved could have imagined. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the discoveries from Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment and of Burrhus Frederic “B.F.” Skinner’s study regarding the importance of environment.
For many years in the past, police action particularly police abuse, has come to be unclear. Citizens are worried about protecting them from criminals. In fact they need to me aware of the corrupt police officers that are in the streets today as well as the criminals. There are many examples that make police brutality the worst as it is today. This one is one of them. Police Officer Daniel is in the choke hold death of Eric Garner, come in the wake if November 15th by the channel 24 news in Ferguson Missouri, police officer would walk free after killing 10 year old Michael Brown. (www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32740523) In the present police brutality does exist in the mist of us in the time and age we live in everyday. We just haven’t seen it yet. There are people that think if a police
According to the National Police Academy, in the past year, there have been over 7,000 reports of police misconduct; fatalities have been linked to more than 400 of these cases (Gul). Police brutality is often triggered by disrespect towards the police officer. The most noticeable form of brutality is physical, where Chemical gas, batons, tasers, and guns, can be used for physical intimidation or to actually hurt people. Police brutality can also take the form of verbal abuse or psychological intimidation. It seems reasonable to understand that sometimes the police are put into situations where excessive force may be needed. But, because some officers use these extreme actions in situations when it is not, police brutality should be addressed and looked into by both the police and the public. For instance, a police officer who beats a nonviolent protester with a baton would probably be accused of excessive use of force, under the argument that the police officer probably could have dealt with the situation less violently.
With simple deaths like Eric Whittaker who died from a head injury from police brutality in