斯坦利-米尔格拉姆的私信:呼吁对 "服从权威 "实验进行规范性解释

Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1177/00483931241252600
Raphaël Künstler
{"title":"斯坦利-米尔格拉姆的私信:呼吁对 \"服从权威 \"实验进行规范性解释","authors":"Raphaël Künstler","doi":"10.1177/00483931241252600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I argue here that the theoretically central aspect of Stanley Milgram’s “experiments on obedience to authority” continues to elude main current commentators because it does not fit into the current paradigm of Milgram’s studies: the presentation and the justification of a set of rules to the subjects. I argue that taking this fact into account radically changes the interpretation of the subjects’ conduct: they are not submitting to an authority, they are not obeying orders, but they are applying a justified rule. If such is indeed the case, the interpretation of the experiments should not be primarily psychological, but normative.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stanley Milgram’s Purloined Letter: A Plea for a Normative Interpretation of the “Obedience to Authority” Experiments\",\"authors\":\"Raphaël Künstler\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00483931241252600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I argue here that the theoretically central aspect of Stanley Milgram’s “experiments on obedience to authority” continues to elude main current commentators because it does not fit into the current paradigm of Milgram’s studies: the presentation and the justification of a set of rules to the subjects. I argue that taking this fact into account radically changes the interpretation of the subjects’ conduct: they are not submitting to an authority, they are not obeying orders, but they are applying a justified rule. If such is indeed the case, the interpretation of the experiments should not be primarily psychological, but normative.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00483931241252600\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00483931241252600","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我在此指出,斯坦利-米尔格拉姆的 "服从权威实验 "在理论上的核心部分仍然没有被当前的主要评论者所发现,因为它不符合米尔格拉姆研究的当前范式:向受试者展示一套规则并证明其合理性。我认为,考虑到这一事实,就会从根本上改变对受试者行为的解释:他们不是服从权威,不是服从命令,而是在应用一种合理的规则。如果情况确实如此,那么对实验的解释就不应该主要是心理学方面的,而应该是规范方面的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Stanley Milgram’s Purloined Letter: A Plea for a Normative Interpretation of the “Obedience to Authority” Experiments
I argue here that the theoretically central aspect of Stanley Milgram’s “experiments on obedience to authority” continues to elude main current commentators because it does not fit into the current paradigm of Milgram’s studies: the presentation and the justification of a set of rules to the subjects. I argue that taking this fact into account radically changes the interpretation of the subjects’ conduct: they are not submitting to an authority, they are not obeying orders, but they are applying a justified rule. If such is indeed the case, the interpretation of the experiments should not be primarily psychological, but normative.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信