This is a DOUBLE-BLOG. The cut-off deadline is
FRIDAY JUNE 5, @ 2:00 PM
1. Nicholson notes that “Since 9/11, and the emergence of torture … the enthusiastic and … uncritical discussion of Milgram’s work has continued… and accelerated.” Speculate on why the events of 9/11 and the so-called “war on terrorism” would be an important to the resurgence of positive interest in Milgram’s experiments
2. Authors of one social psychology textbook admit that Milgram’s experiments were “controversial, “ but Nicholson observes that these authors “provide no discussion…of anything ethical or epistemological problems with the research.” What is epistemology, and what sort of epistemological “problems” might there be with Milgram’s experiments?
3. According to data collected at the debriefing, 84% of participants “were glad” they had been involved in the experiment, and “4 out of 5”… felt that more experiments of this sort should be carried out.” Milgram, in his own writing, asserts, with regards to criticisms made about the ethics of leading participants into believe they had essentially tortured another person, that “the participant… rather than the critic must be the ultimate source of judgement.” (155) In other words, the psychological and sociological experts who have questioned the ethics of Milgram’s experiment should not be the ones who ultimately decide what sorts of research is harmful to the participant. What are some possible issues or problems with this perspective?
4. Summarize Nicholson’s critique of “the very meaning of the study itself” (155). Specifically discuss the two definitions of obedience outlined in the article and how Milgram (according to Nicholson) “blended” them.
5. Milgram concludes that people will obey a command if it is given by a person in authority. But Nicholson argues that venue or setting itself presents a condition that is more in keeping with the social contract rather than pure authority. (160 - 62). Summarize Nicholson’s discussion on this point. Also, If you are in an unfamiliar social situation, do you think you are more or less likely to follow instructions from an authority figure even if you find the instructions troubling?
6. Late in the article. Nicholson discuss the possible link between Milgram’s physical size and his sense of power in running the experiments (164 -65). Discuss your thoughts on this analysis. Do you feel that such a personal interpretation of Milgram’s motives is legitimate?
7. How did the protocols for the experiment that Dimow experienced different from the protocols described by Milgram? Are these differences meaningful or trivial?
8. Dimtow is told that the shocks are not dangerous because the amperage is lowered as the voltage is increased (amperages, or “amps” are what actually cause electrocutions). Why do you think Dimtow was told this when other participants weren’t?