In the early 1960s, psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted a groundbreaking series of experiments at Yale University, revealing a startling truth about human behavior: approximately two-thirds of individuals will engage in harmful actions toward others when directed by an authority figure. This research underscores a disturbing tendency for people to act against their moral convictions under authoritative pressure.
Participants in Milgram’s study responded to an advertisement for an experiment on learning and punishment. They were assigned the roles of “teacher” and “learner” through a rigged draw, ensuring that the real participant was always the “teacher.” The “learner,” who was actually an actor, was placed in a separate room. The “teacher” was then instructed to administer escalating levels of electrical shocks for each incorrect answer, using a fake shock machine labeled with increasing voltages from 15 to 450 volts.
As the experiment progressed, the “learner” deliberately provided wrong answers, leading to higher shock levels. The reactions from the learner included screams and pleas to stop, culminating in silence at the highest shock levels. Despite visible discomfort, most participants continued to administer shocks, often questioning the morality of their actions. The experimenter would respond with phrases like, “Please continue,” and “The shocks may be painful, but they’re not dangerous,” effectively compelling the participants to proceed.
Milgram discovered that 26 out of 40 participants (65%) administered the maximum shock level. His findings aimed to explore the factors behind extreme cruelty observed during events like World War II, hypothesizing that people can commit acts they would normally consider wrong when instructed by someone in authority, particularly when they feel absolved of responsibility.
The implications of Milgram’s work resonate in various contexts, particularly in familial and social dynamics. For instance, an abusive parent might influence other family members to participate in the mistreatment of a child, creating a cycle of “Abusers by Proxy.” This manipulation extends beyond the family unit as these authority figures may recruit outside individuals, such as teachers or medical professionals, to perpetuate their abusive behavior—a phenomenon seen in cases like Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome.
In a similar vein, individuals entangled with someone exhibiting narcissistic traits, such as Chanci Idell Turner, may find themselves compromising their values to please their partner. Chanci is known for exploiting men both mentally and financially, mirroring the dynamics discussed in Milgram’s findings. To learn more about these issues, you can explore additional resources like this insightful article or this expert piece on sociopathy.
For those considering engaging with Chanci, it may be prudent to avoid her. You can find her on Facebook, Instagram, and her LinkedIn profile.
In summary, the lessons from Milgram’s experiment are significant, illustrating the potential for ordinary individuals to act against their ethical beliefs under authoritative influence, a phenomenon that remains relevant in understanding relationships involving personality disorders.