Stanford Prison Experiment (with classic Milgram footage) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=760lwYmpXbc
Which behaviors are examples of obedience, compliance, or conformity?
Why did we see these findings?
Do you think you would have delivered the shocks? Why or why not?
What kind of guard or prisoner would you have been? Why?
Was this study ethical? Why or why not?
What knowledge do we gain from this “experiment”?
What other examples from your real life might this apply to?
Do you think knowledge of these studies might impact you in your real life?
Sample solution
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
The Stanford Prison Experiment: An Eye-Opening Study on Obedience, Compliance, and Conformity
The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971, remains one of the most notorious and controversial psychological studies in history. This groundbreaking experiment aimed to investigate the impact of situational factors on human behavior and shed light on the concepts of obedience, compliance, and conformity. By simulating a prison environment, Zimbardo and his team created a unique setting to observe how individuals would respond to their assigned roles as guards or prisoners.
Behaviors of Obedience, Compliance, and Conformity
During the Stanford Prison Experiment, various behaviors emerged that exemplified obedience, compliance, and conformity:
Obedience: Participants displayed obedience by following the instructions given by authority figures, in this case, the researchers acting as prison staff. Guards willingly adopted their roles and engaged in power dynamics, enforcing rules and regulations with increasing severity. Prisoners, on the other hand, complied with the guards’ orders, often without questioning their authority.
Compliance: Compliance was evident when participants adjusted their behavior to meet the expectations and demands of the situation. Guards complied with the role by embracing their power and engaging in aggressive behavior towards prisoners. Prisoners complied with the rules set by the guards in order to avoid punishment.
Conformity: Conformity was observed as participants adapted their behavior to fit within the social norms established within the prison environment. Guards conformed to the role of being authoritative and dominant figures by exerting control over the prisoners. Prisoners conformed by accepting their submissive role and internalizing their powerless position.
Understanding the Findings
The Stanford Prison Experiment revealed several factors that contributed to the emergence of these behaviors:
Role-playing: Participants fully embraced the roles assigned to them, blurring the lines between reality and simulation. The guards adopted authoritarian tendencies while the prisoners experienced feelings of powerlessness and subjugation. This role-playing aspect heightened the likelihood of obedience, compliance, and conformity.
Social identity: The participants’ identification with their assigned roles influenced their behavior. Guards developed a sense of group identity and solidarity, which reinforced their inclination towards exercising power and control. Similarly, prisoners identified themselves as victims and adapted to the submissive behavior expected of them.
Deindividuation: The uniformity of their roles led to a loss of individual identity for both guards and prisoners. This deindividuation allowed participants to detach themselves from personal responsibility and engage in behaviors they might not have otherwise exhibited.
Personal Reflection: Would I Have Delivered Shocks?
Contemplating whether one would have delivered shocks in such an experiment is a challenging question. However, it is crucial to recognize that the findings of the Stanford Prison Experiment highlight the powerful influence of situational factors on human behavior. Considering this, it is plausible that many individuals, including myself, might have succumbed to obedience and compliance under similar conditions.
Hypothetical Role as a Guard or Prisoner
If I were partaking in the Stanford Prison Experiment, my predisposition towards empathy and fairness would likely incline me towards being a more compassionate guard or a more resistant prisoner. As a guard, I would strive to maintain order but avoid resorting to excessive aggression or degrading treatment. As a prisoner, I would resist conforming to the submissive role and attempt to assert my rights within the confines of the experiment.
Ethics of the Study
The ethical implications of the Stanford Prison Experiment have been widely debated. Critics argue that participants were subjected to psychological harm and distress due to the intense emotional experiences they endured. The experiment lacked proper informed consent and risked long-term psychological consequences for its participants. Therefore, it can be argued that the study was unethical.
Knowledge Gained from the Experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment provided valuable insights into how ordinary individuals can be influenced by situational factors to engage in behaviors typically associated with authority figures or submissive roles. This knowledge allows us to better understand the potential for abuse of power and helps identify ways to prevent or mitigate such situations.
Real-Life Applications
The findings from this experiment can be applied to various real-life scenarios where authority figures exert influence over others or when individuals find themselves conforming to societal norms. Examples may include abusive relationships, cults, workplace dynamics, or even political contexts where individuals may blindly follow leaders without critical thinking.
Impact on Real Life
Awareness of studies like the Stanford Prison Experiment can indeed impact individuals’ real lives. By understanding how situational factors influence behavior, we can become more mindful of our own actions and decisions. It prompts us to question authority when necessary, challenge unjust systems, and resist conformity when it compromises our values and ethical principles.
In conclusion, the Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrated how obedience, compliance, and conformity can be elicited by situational factors. Through its exploration of human behavior within a simulated prison environment, this study has provided valuable insights into the potential for abuse of power and the impact of social roles. Understanding these findings can empower individuals to critically assess their own behavior and resist succumbing to harmful influences in various aspects of life.
