To all,
A great discussion as these dynamics are present in our work most of the
time. A side note Madonna is producing a feature film on the Stanford
Experiment as we speak. I think what I remember most about it was that when
the (student) Prison guards put sunglasses on they could put fellow
(prisoner) students under even crueler conditions. There is something about
NOT being able to look into the eyes of your Guard? And the guards had a
drunkenness of power from the anominimity of the perpetrator NOT being
looked in the eye by the victim etc
Does the uniform somehow differentiate
good from bad in the torturers eyes? Or does it give them solace that they
are the right ones dressed in uniformity and the civilians are the bad or
not so good ones deserving less than humane treatment?
Not to mention the SS in black, sadomasochistic Nazi Leather Drag against
the downtrodden striped pajamas forced on their unfortunate Jewish
prisoners?
Do a lot of these Perpetrator/victim dynamics boil down to being SEEN or NOT
SEEN suffering?
Food for constructive thought? Thanks for this enlightening global
discussion. Sincerely Gary Stuart LA, CA
From: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alison Rose Levy
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 7:18 PM
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ConstellationTalk] Crime and punishment
Hi Anngwyn:
I¹m so glad you brought up the Lucifer Effect, which I recently read.
Looking back on the Stanford Prison experiment, Zimbardo, who directed the
experiment and is also the book¹s author concluded that while there is a
tendency to attribute ³evil² or ³bad behavior² to a ³few bad apples,² that
in fact ³bad behavior² is more a function of the situation than is commonly
assumed when we attribute it to the individual personality.
In other words, he concluded that most people in a given situation or role
would tend to behave in a similar fashion something we actually see in
constellations where the context and placement are key to the
representative¹s experience.
Obviously, this does not obviate personal responsibility.
One of the shocks of the Lucifer Effect is that in the Stanford experiment,
one of the most brutal ³guards² was a student who self-reported as a
humanitarian in the initial interview; also the professor running the
experiment (Zimbardo) became entrained in his administrative authority and
lost his moral compass, failing to intervene until the situation had
degenerated. He was awakened from his trance by someone outside the context
his girlfriend.
Finally, the recent documentary film, The Corporation, produced in Canada,
portrays the situational context of corporations, and rates them on a
psychological scale (as psychopathic). At the beginning, in a montage of
news footage, reporters repeatedly characterize criminal corporate leaders
as a ³few bad apples,² again belying the societal, structural, and
historical contexts that will tend to generate unethical, harmful behavior.
Alison
On 3/3/08 12:33 PM, Anngwyn at anngwyn@xxxxxxx <mailto:anngwyn%40aol.com>
wrote:
to
Hello All,
Sooner or later those of us who work with victims and perpetrators have to
give some serious thought as to our understanding of good and evil. The
short version might be that they are interdependent, one cannot exist
without the other. Bert's thoughts on this subject have been very
challenging for therapists who believe that their task is to rescue good
victims from bad perpetrators.
Philip Zimbardo's book The Lucifer Effect has much to offer in explaining
how it is that good people can come to do bad things. In 1971 he conducted
a now famous experiment with Stanford students dividing them into
prisoners" and "guards". It became so brutally out of control that it had
be stopped after a week.the
And then there is also another famous experiment that was done at Yale
during the 1960s by Stanley Milgram. He set up a model whereby actors were
hired to be "learners" who would receive an electric shock if they gave a
wrong answer. There were no actual shocks given. The researcher posed as a
teacher" who then instructed volunteers for the study to administer the
shocks". for the learners own good. Most people would continue to press
shock lever long after the "learners" (simulated) screams of pain.Few
questioned the instruction to continue inflicting pain as they were told
that this was "necessary"
All for now...
Anngwyn
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
