I've watched men trained to do whatever it takes to survive balk at torture. That's why I think the general population would be even less likely to follow through on it unless their own life (or the life of someone they love) required it.


>>Yes I do.
>
>You're probably right. But the pre-experiment prognosticators back then also had it wrong, assuming few would comply.
>
>
>>
>>
>>>>I see, a 1974 study. It would be interesting to see a more recent one.
>>>
>>>I believe it was quite definitive in its day. Do you think there wuld be a different result today?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>My original observation still stands. What sort of person must one be to even be able to torture another human being? My assumption is that it must be a person devoid of empathy. My guess? A sociopath at least, and maybe even a psychopath.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Just any Joe Q off the street. The experiments were performed (with actors who pretended to be suffering great pain) and the random sample of people had no trouble dialing it to ten. Just as long as they got good reassurance they won't be blamed and that it was for a good cause.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Are there stats on this? Out of every 100 Joes, how many stopped and how many didn't?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I *think* this is the experiment DraganN is referring to.
>>>>>http://home.swbell.net/revscat/perilsOfObedience.html
>>>>>
>>>>>I thought it was rather famous and that everyone knew about it.