Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
bailey | 10 hours ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 The phD who led the study rigged it to get the results he was after. A ton of issues with the study - the guards didn’t know they were subjects, he told the public there were no rules except no physical harm but he did a day of training to prime them to be aggressive, etc. highly recommend checking out the doc. Many of the subjects came back and share their POV
▲ ▼
MAHDOOD | 10 hours ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 What would you say is the main takeaway of the study then? Is there anything of value that can be derived from it?
▲ ▼
bailey | 9 hours ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Yes, when directed leadership, people have the capacity to do bad things- as we have seen historically. However, it is not an individual’s first nature to be evil, violent, bad (whatever synonym resonates) unless influenced. The current understanding of the study is that when given power, all people are bad, which is incorrect and harmful.
▲ ▼
MAHDOOD | 9 hours ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 What’s the name of the documentary?
▲ ▼
Modus | 9 hours ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 You can't conclude that it's not in an individual's nature to be violent.

I think all you should do is throw away the false conclusions and go back to not knowing.
▲ ▼
bailey | 3 hours ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Agree with you on this. The point I was making was that the study doesn’t prove that people are inherently evil when given access to power. Can see how my phrasing sounded absolute and appreciate the clarification.
▲ ▼
bailey | 3 hours ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 BBC replicated the experiment in 2002 and found that group dynamics and leadership were major factors in influencing the guard’s treatment toward prisoners, I.e. void of leadership - the guards were not motivated to participate in violence or abuse toward the prisoners. It’s covered in the doc and easily found online. That’s why I used that specific language when responding to what conclusions could still be derived from the study. However, given the obvious flaws in the design of the study - I’m in agreement that we should default to not knowing.