When power is granted to an individual to exert over another, interesting things can happen. The balance of authority is often tenuous and can be navigated if the semblance of order is respected and followed. When that order is ignored and the authority is placed in the hands of those who seek to use it for personal gain however, the balance is quickly lost. The Stanford Prison Experiment shows how absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Seeking to display the very real situations that occur between prison guards and convicts, a study was conducted at Stanford University in 1971 to test the psychological effects that are experienced upon becoming a prison guard or a convict. Professor Philip Zimbardo, along with several researchers, undertook an attempt to discover what happened when a group of students were divided into guards and prisoners. Over a two week period the students were subjected to the constant day in and day out dynamics of guard and prisoner, and were paid to play their roles.
Unfortunately as it could have been expected, placing such authority in the hands of someone who is less than qualified for such power eventually went awry. When the guards and prisoners began to inevitably clash, the pretend roles soon became the reality that each participant was faced with. The guards soon turned violent upon mock inmates. At one point they went so far as to convince several of the prisoners to turn upon those who wouldn’t follow the new rules that were continuously laid down by the false guards. This was the breakdown in the system, and where it should have been stopped in order to preserve at least a small amount of integrity to the test.
Instead Professor Zimbardo allowed the punishments and violence to continue, even
going so far as to allow the guards to humiliate and heap great amounts of stress and
psychological abuse upon the inmates. His methods were highly unethical and had been suspect
since before the violence began. As the torture was allowed to continue however his utter lack of morals became a serious problem. When Professor Zimbardo began to act the role of Superintendent it had already been pushed too far (The Stanford Prison Experiment, 2015).
In allowing the students to become caught up in their roles the ethical nature of the experiment became seriously compromised. At that point Professor Zimbardo should have by all rights ended the experiment, paid the students for their time, and done his best to see that each student received counseling. Instead the experiment was ended after six days in which the “inmates” were tortured, beaten, and forced to suffer psychological damage that required therapy to alleviate. Professor Zimbardo has become one of many names throughout history that is now associated with what can happen when an experiment goes wrong.
The disregard for the welfare of others in the name of science is not a new practice, but it is one that carries overwhelming ramifications for those involved. In ignoring the assault upon human dignity and allowing the students involved to treat each other in such a manner, Professor Zimbardo repeatedly crossed several moral and ethical lines. His research would have no doubt been invaluable, but breaking his own rules was a serious breach of ethics that could not and should not have been ignored. Worse still, upon realizing what was happening Professor Zimbardo only increased the damage by becoming less than objective in his role as the superintendent.
In regards to the defining of human nature the Stanford experiment was a success, but this is the only accolade that it can claim. Throughout the six days that it was allowed to run, the experiment showed the manner by which power can be abused, and how it can corrupt. When one individual has authority over another the propensity for corruption is typically a 50/50 chance. Sometimes all that matters is which side an individual is on.
References
Leary, K. (Producer), & Alvarez, K.P. (Director). (2015). The Stanford Prison Experiment
[Motion Picture]. USA: IFC Films.
