Philosophers, dramatists, theologians have grappled with this question for centuries: what makes people go wrong? Interestingly, I asked this question when I was a little kid. I grew up in the South Bronx, inner-city ghetto in New York, and I was surrounded by evil, as all kids are who grew up in an inner city. And I had friends who were really good kids, who lived out the Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde scenario -- Robert Louis Stevenson. That is, they took drugs, got in trouble, went to jail. Some got killed, and some did it without drug assistance.
Filozofi, dramaturzi, teolozi stoljećima se bore s pitanjem: Što tjera ljude da krenu krivim putem? Postavio sam si to pitanje još dok sam bio dječak. Kad sam bio dječak, odrastajući u južnom Bronxu, središnjem i siromašnom getu u New Yorku, bio sam okružen zlom, kao i svi klinci koji su odrasli u siromašnom dijelu grada. Imao sam prijatelje koji su bili jako dobra djeca, a živjeli su pravim doktor Jekyll i gospodin Hyde životom -- Robert Louis Stevenson. Odnosno, drogirali su se, upadali u nevolje i bili u zatvoru. Neki su ubijeni, a nekima je to uspjelo bez pomoći droge.
So when I read Robert Louis Stevenson, that wasn't fiction. The only question is, what was in the juice? And more importantly, that line between good and evil -- which privileged people like to think is fixed and impermeable, with them on the good side, the others on the bad side -- I knew that line was movable, and it was permeable. Good people could be seduced across that line, and under good and some rare circumstances, bad kids could recover with help, with reform, with rehabilitation.
I kada sam pročitao Roberta Louisa Stevensona, to za mene nije bila fikcija. Jedino pitanje je, što je bilo u napitku? I još važnije, da granica između dobra i zla -- za koju privilegirani ljudi misle da je fiksna i neporozna, s njima na strani dobra, i drugim ljudima na strani zla -- znao sam da ju je moguće pomaknuti i da jest porozna. Dobre ljude moguće je zavesti da prijeđu tu granicu, a u dobrim i rijetkim okolnostima loša djeca mogu se oporaviti uz pomoć, reforme i rehabilitaciju.
So I want to begin with this wonderful illusion by [Dutch] artist M.C. Escher. If you look at it and focus on the white, what you see is a world full of angels. But let's look more deeply, and as we do, what appears is the demons, the devils in the world. That tells us several things.
Zbog toga želim započeti s ovom divnom iluzijom [nizozemskog] umjetnika M.C. Eschera. Ako ju gledate i usredotočite se na bijele dijelove, ono što vidite je svijet pun anđela. Ali pogledajmo dublje, i kako gledamo, pojavljuju se zlodusi, demoni svijeta. A to nam govori nekoliko stvari.
One, the world is, was, will always be filled with good and evil, because good and evil is the yin and yang of the human condition. It tells me something else. If you remember, God's favorite angel was Lucifer. Apparently, Lucifer means "the light." It also means "the morning star," in some scripture. And apparently, he disobeyed God, and that's the ultimate disobedience to authority. And when he did, Michael, the archangel, was sent to kick him out of heaven along with the other fallen angels. And so Lucifer descends into hell, becomes Satan, becomes the devil, and the force of evil in the universe begins.
Prvo: svijet jest, uvijek je bio i uvijek će biti ispunjen i dobrom i zlom jer dobro i zlo su Yin i Yang ljudskog stanja. Govori mi i nešto drugo. Ako se sjećate, Božji omiljeni anđeo bio je Lucifer. Navodno, Lucifer znači "svjetlo". A prema nekim zapisima također znači i "jutarnja zvijezda". A navodno on nije bio poslušan prema Bogu, što je najveće moguće nepoštivanje autoriteta. A kad je to učinio, arhanđeo Mihael je poslan da ga izbaci iz raja zajedno s drugim palim anđelima. I tako Lucifer silazi u pakao, postaje Sotona, postaje vrag i počinje sila zla u svemiru.
Paradoxically, it was God who created hell as a place to store evil. He didn't do a good job of keeping it there though. So, this arc of the cosmic transformation of God's favorite angel into the Devil, for me, sets the context for understanding human beings who are transformed from good, ordinary people into perpetrators of evil.
Paradoksalno, upravo je Bog stvorio pakao kao mjesto za smještanje zla. Doduše, nije dobro obavio posao držanja zla tamo. Dakle, ova linija kozmičke pretvorbe omiljenog Božjeg anđela u vraga, za mene postavlja kontekst za razumijevanje ljudi koji se iz dobrih, običnih ljudi, pretvaraju u počinitelje zla.
So the Lucifer effect, although it focuses on the negatives -- the negatives that people can become, not the negatives that people are -- leads me to a psychological definition. Evil is the exercise of power. And that's the key: it's about power. To intentionally harm people psychologically, to hurt people physically, to destroy people mortally, or ideas, and to commit crimes against humanity. If you Google "evil," a word that should surely have withered by now, you come up with 136 million hits in a third of a second.
Tako me Luciferov efekt, iako se usredotočuje na negativnosti -- negativnosti koje ljudi mogu postati, a ne negativnosti koje ljudi jesu -- vodi u psihološku definiciju: zlo je upotrebljavanje moći. I to je ključ: radi se o moći. Namjerno psihički naškoditi ljudima, tjelesno ozlijediti ljude, ubiti nekoga, ili ubiti ideje, i počiniti zločine protiv čovječnosti. Ako u Google unesete "zlo", riječ koja je do sada trebala nestati, dobiti ćete 136 milijuna rezultata za trećinu sekunde.
A few years ago -- I am sure all of you were shocked, as I was, with the revelation of American soldiers abusing prisoners in a strange place in a controversial war, Abu Ghraib in Iraq. And these were men and women who were putting prisoners through unbelievable humiliation. I was shocked, but I wasn't surprised, because I had seen those same visual parallels when I was the prison superintendent of the Stanford Prison Study.
Prije nekoliko godina -- siguran sam da ste svi vi bili šokirani, kao što sam i ja bio, s otkrićem o američkim vojnicima koji zlostavljaju zarobljenike na čudnom mjestu u kontroverznom ratu: Abu Ghraibu u Iraku. A ovo su muškarci i žene koji su tjerali zarobljenike na nevjerojatna poniženja. Bio sam šokiran, ali ne i iznenađen, jer sam iste vizualne usporedbe vidio dok sam bio upravnitelj zatvora tijekom studije Stanfordskog zatvora.
Immediately the Bush administration military said what? What all administrations say when there's a scandal: "Don't blame us. It's not the system. It's the few bad apples, the few rogue soldiers." My hypothesis is, American soldiers are good, usually. Maybe it was the barrel that was bad. But how am I going to deal with that hypothesis?
Busheva vojna administracija odmah je objavila ... što? Ono što svaka vlada objavi nakon što se dogodi skandal. "Nemojte kriviti nas. Nije sustav kriv. Razlog je nekoliko pokvarenih jabuka, nekoliko odmetnutih vojnika." Moja pretpostavka je da su američki vojnici uglavnom dobri. Možda je posuda koja drži jabuke bila pokvarena. Ali kako ću - kako ću se ja pomiriti s tom hipotezom?
I became an expert witness for one of the guards, Sergeant Chip Frederick, and in that position, I had access to the dozen investigative reports. I had access to him. I could study him, have him come to my home, get to know him, do psychological analysis to see, was he a good apple or bad apple. And thirdly, I had access to all of the 1,000 pictures that these soldiers took. These pictures are of a violent or sexual nature. All of them come from the cameras of American soldiers. Because everybody has a digital camera or cell phone camera, they took pictures of everything, more than 1,000.
Postao sam vještakom za jednog od čuvara, narednika Chipa Fredericka, i na tom sam položaju imao pristup desecima istražnih izvješća. Imao sam pristup do njega. Mogao sam ga proučavati, dovesti ga u svoj dom, upoznati ga, i napraviti psihološku analizu da vidim je li on dobra ili pokvarena jabuka. I treće, imao sam pristup do svih 1000 fotografija koje su vojnici napravili. Ove su slike nasilne ili seksualne prirode. Sve fotografije su uslikali američki vojnici. Budući da svatko ima digitalni fotoaparat ili fotoaparat u mobitelu, fotografirali su sve.Više od 1000 fotografija.
And what I've done is I organized them into various categories. But these are by United States military police, army reservists. They are not soldiers prepared for this mission at all. And it all happened in a single place, Tier 1-A, on the night shift. Why? Tier 1-A was the center for military intelligence. It was the interrogation hold. The CIA was there. Interrogators from Titan Corporation, all there, and they're getting no information about the insurgency. So they're going to put pressure on these soldiers, military police, to cross the line, give them permission to break the will of the enemy, to prepare them for interrogation, to soften them up, to take the gloves off. Those are the euphemisms, and this is how it was interpreted. Let's go down to that dungeon.
A ono što sam ja napravio je razvrstao ih u različite kategorije. Ali ove su napravili pripadnici američke vojne policije, vojni rezervisti. Oni nisu vojnici koji su bili pripremljeni za ovu misiju. I sve se to dogodilo na jednom mjestu, razini 1A, tijekom noćne smjene. Zašto? Razina 1A bila je središte vojne inteligencije. To je bio prostor za ispitivanje zarobljenika. CIA se nalazila tamo. Ispitivači iz tvrtke Titan, svi su bili tamo, i nisu uspijevali dobiti bilo kakve informacije o pobuni. Stoga su odlučili napraviti pritisak na te vojnike, vojnu policiju, da prijeđu granicu, i dati im dopuštenje da slome volju neprijatelja, da ih pripreme za ispitivanja, da ih omekšaju, da skinu rukavice.To su izrazi koje su koristili, a ovako su bili protumačeni. Idemo dolje do tamnice.
(Typewriting)
(Blenda fotoaparata)
[Abu Ghraib Iraq Prison Abuses 2008 Military Police Guards' Photos]
[The following images include nudity and graphic depictions of violence]
(Camera shutter sounds)
(Thuds)
(Lupanje)
(Camera shutter)
(Blenda fotoaparata)
(Camera shutter)
(Lupanje)
(Breathing)
(Disanje)
(Bells)
(Zvona)
(Bells end)
So, pretty horrific. That's one of the visual illustrations of evil. And it should not have escaped you that the reason I paired the prisoner with his arms out with Leonardo da Vinci's ode to humanity is that that prisoner was mentally ill. That prisoner covered himself with shit every day, they had to roll him in dirt so he wouldn't stink. But the guards ended up calling him "Shit Boy." What was he doing in that prison rather than in some mental institution?
Dakle, prilično grozno. To je jedna od vizualnih ilustracija zla. I trebali ste primijetiti da je razlog zbog kojeg sam upario sliku zarobljenika raširenih ruku s Da Vincijevom Odom čovječnosti, taj da je zatočenik psihički bolestan. Taj zarobljenik mazao se izmetom svaki dan, i vojnici su ga morali uvaljati u blato da ne bi smrdio. Ali stražari su ga na kraju zvali Posranko. Kako se on našao u tom zatvoru, a ne u nekoj instituciji za mentalne bolesti?
In any event, here's former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. He comes down and says, "I want to know, who is responsible? Who are the bad apples?" Well, that's a bad question. You have to reframe it and ask, "What is responsible?" "What" could be the who of people, but it could also be the what of the situation, and obviously that's wrongheaded.
U svakom slučaju, ovdje bivši ministar obrane Rumsfeld dolazi i kaže - Želim znati tko je odgovoran Tko su pokvarene jabuke? - To je krivo pitanje. Morate pitanje preoblikovati i pitati: "Što je odgovorno?" Budući da "što" mogu biti ljudi, ali također može biti i situacija, i očito je upravo to krivo. Kako onda psiholozi pristupaju razumijevanju
How do psychologists try to understand such transformations of human character, if you believe that they were good soldiers before they went down to that dungeon? There are three ways. The main way is called dispositional. We look at what's inside of the person, the bad apples.
takve pretvorbe ljudskog karaktera, ako vjerujete da su oni bili dobri vojnici prije nego što su otišli dolje u tamnice? Postoje tri načina. Osnovni način je promatranje unutarnjih čimbenika ponašanja. Promatramo što je unutar osobe, onih pokvarenih jabuka.
This is the foundation of all of social science, the foundation of religion, the foundation of war. Social psychologists like me come along and say, "Yeah, people are the actors on the stage, but you'll have to be aware of the situation. Who are the cast of characters? What's the costume? Is there a stage director?" And so we're interested in what are the external factors around the individual -- the bad barrel? Social scientists stop there and they miss the big point that I discovered when I became an expert witness for Abu Ghraib. The power is in the system. The system creates the situation that corrupts the individuals, and the system is the legal, political, economic, cultural background. And this is where the power is of the bad-barrel makers.
Upravo to je osnova svih društvenih znanosti, osnova religije, osnova rata. Društveni psiholozi poput mene kažu - Da, ljudi su glumci na pozornici, ali morate biti svjesni i situacije. Tko su glumci uloga? Koje kostime nose? Postoji li redatelj? Nas zanima koji su vanjski čimbenici oko pojedinca, odnosno pokvarena posuda I sociolozi se tamo zaustave i propuste najvažniju poantu koju sam ja otkrio kada sam postao vještakom za Abu Ghraibu. Moć se nalazi u sustavu. Sustav stvara situacije koje kvare pojedince i sustav je pravna, politička, ekonomska i kulturna pozadina. I ovdje se nalazi moć ljudi koji proizvode pokvarene posude.
If you want to change a person, change the situation. And to change it, you've got to know where the power is, in the system. So the Lucifer effect involves understanding human character transformations with these three factors. And it's a dynamic interplay. What do the people bring into the situation? What does the situation bring out of them? And what is the system that creates and maintains that situation?
Dakle, ako želite promijeniti neku osobu morate promijeniti situaciju. Ako želite promijeniti situaciju, morate znati gdje se u sustavu nalazi moć. Na taj način Luciferov efekt uključuje razumijevanje transformacije ljudskog karaktera primjenom ova tri čimbenika. Osim toga, to je dinamična veza. Što ljudi donose u situaciju? Što situacija izvlači iz njih? I kakav sustav stvara i održava tu situaciju?
My recent book, "The Lucifer Effect," is about, how do you understand how good people turn evil? And it has a lot of detail about what I'm going to talk about today. So Dr. Z's "Lucifer Effect," although it focuses on evil, really is a celebration of the human mind's infinite capacity to make any of us kind or cruel, caring or indifferent, creative or destructive, and it makes some of us villains. And the good news that I'm going to hopefully come to at the end is that it makes some of us heroes. This wonderful cartoon in the New Yorker summarizes my whole talk: "I'm neither a good cop nor a bad cop, Jerome. Like yourself, I'm a complex amalgam of positive and negative personality traits that emerge or not, depending on the circumstances."
Moja se knjiga, Luciferov efekt, nedavno objavljena, bavi time kako shvatiti kako dobri ljudi postaju zli? U knjizi ima puno detalja u vezi toga o čemu ću danas pričati. Dakle, "Lucifer efekt", iako fokusiran na zlo, ustvari je slavljenje beskrajnog kapaciteta ljudskog uma da bilo koga od nas učini ili dobrim ili okrutnim, brižnim ili ravnodušnim, kreativnim ili destruktivnim, i pretvara neke od nas u zločince. Priča o dobroj vijesti do koje se nadam da ću doći na kraju govora je da neke od nas pretvara u junake. Ovo je prekrasan strip u časopisu New Yorker, koji jako dobro rezimira moj cijeli govor: "Ja sam ni dobar ni loš policajac, Jerome. Kao ti, i ja sam složen spoj pozitivnih i negativnih osobina ličnosti koje se ili pojavljuju ili ne, ovisno o okolnostima."
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
There's a study some of you think you know about, but very few people have ever read the story. You watched the movie. This is Stanley Milgram, little Jewish kid from the Bronx, and he asked the question, "Could the Holocaust happen here, now?" People say, "No, that's Nazi Germany, Hitler, you know, that's 1939." He said, "Yeah, but suppose Hitler asked you, 'Would you electrocute a stranger?' 'No way, I'm a good person.'" He said, "Why don't we put you in a situation and give you a chance to see what you would do?"
Postoji studija za koju neki od vas misle da ju znaju, ali vrlo je malo ljudi koji su pročitali priču. Gledali ste film. Ovo je Stanley Milgrom, židovski dječak iz Bronxa, i on je postavio pitanje, "Bi li se holokaust mogao dogoditi ovdje, sada?" Ljudi kažu: "Ne, to je bilo u nacističkoj Njemačkoj, to je Hitler, znaš, to je 1939. godina." A on je rekao, "Da, ali pretpostavimo da je Hitler pitao vas, 'Biste li ubili stranca strujom?''Nema šanse, ne ja, ja sam dobra osoba.' On je rekao: "Zašto vas ne bismo stavili u situaciju i dali vam priliku da vidite što ćete učiniti?"
And so what he did was he tested 1,000 ordinary people. 500 New Haven, Connecticut, 500 Bridgeport. And the ad said, "Psychologists want to understand memory. We want to improve people's memory, because it is the key to success." OK? "We're going to give you five bucks -- four dollars for your time. We don't want college students. We want men between 20 and 50." In the later studies, they ran women. Ordinary people: barbers, clerks, white-collar people.
I tako je proveo ispitivanje nad 1000 običnih ljudi. 500 u New Havenu, Connecticut; 500 u Bridgeportu. Oglas je glasio, "Psiholozi žele razumjeti pamćenje, želimo poboljšati pamćenje ljudi, jer pamćenje je ključ uspjeha." U redu? "Dati ćemo vam pet dolara - četiri dolara za vaše vrijeme." I dalje glasi: "Ne trebamo studente; trebamo muškarace između 20 i 50 godina" -- u kasnijim studijama proveli su ispitivanja i na ženama -- "obične ljude: brijače, trgovce, ljude koji rade u uredima."
So, you go down, one of you will be a learner, one will be a teacher. The learner's a genial, middle-aged guy. He gets tied up to the shock apparatus in another room. The learner could be middle-aged, could be as young as 20. And one of you is told by the authority, the guy in the lab coat, "Your job as teacher is to give him material to learn. Gets it right, reward. Gets it wrong, you press a button on the shock box. The first button is 15 volts. He doesn't even feel it." That's the key. All evil starts with 15 volts. And then the next step is another 15 volts. The problem is, at the end of the line, it's 450 volts. And as you go along, the guy is screaming, "I've got a heart condition! I'm out of here!"
I tako se javite na oglas i netko od vas bit će učenik, a drugi će biti učitelj. Učenik je srdačan, srednjovječan muškarac. Njega vežu na aparat za elektrošokove u drugoj sobi. Učenik bi mogao biti srednjovječan, a mogao bi biti i u dvadesetima. Jednom od vas osoba s autoritetom, osoba u laboratorijskoj kuti, kaže "Vaš posao kao učitelja je da ovom čovjeku date sredstvo za učenje. Ako napavi dobro, nagradite ga. Ako pogriješi, pritisnite tipku na kutiji za upravljanje šokovima. Prva tipka je 15 volti. On to niti ne osjeća. " I to je ključ. Svako zlo počinje s 15 volti. A onda slijedi još 15 volti. Problem je što, na kraju priče, to bude 450 volti. I kako se sve odvija, čovjek počne vrištati "Imam srčanu bolest! Ja odlazim! "
You're a good person. You complain. "Sir, who will be responsible if something happens to him?" The experimenter says, "Don't worry, I will be responsible. Continue, teacher." And the question is, who would go all the way to 450 volts? You should notice here, when it gets up to 375, it says, "Danger. Severe Shock." When it gets up to here, there's "XXX" -- the pornography of power.
A vi ste dobra osoba. Prigovarate. "Gospodine, tko će biti odgovoran ako mu se nešto dogodi?" Izvođač eksperimenta kaže: "Ne brinite, ja ću biti odgovoran. Nastavite, učitelju. " I pitanje je, tko će ići sve do 450 volti? Treba napomenuti da kada se dođe do 375 volti, na uređaju piše, "Opasnost: ozbiljan elektrošok". Kada dođe do ove razine, to je "XXX": pornografija moći.
So Milgram asks 40 psychiatrists,
(Smijeh)
"What percent of American citizens would go to the end?" They said only one percent. Because that's sadistic behavior, and we know, psychiatry knows, only one percent of Americans are sadistic. OK. Here's the data. They could not be more wrong. Two thirds go all the way to 450 volts. This was just one study. Milgram did more than 16 studies. And look at this. In study 16, where you see somebody like you go all the way, 90 percent go all the way. In study five, if you see people rebel, 90 percent rebel. What about women? Study 13 -- no different than men. So Milgram is quantifying evil as the willingness of people to blindly obey authority, to go all the way to 450 volts. And it's like a dial on human nature. A dial in a sense that you can make almost everybody totally obedient, down to the majority, down to none.
I onda Milgrom pita 40 psihijatara, "Koji postotak američkih građana će ići do kraja?" Oni su rekli samo 1 posto. Budući da je to sadističko ponašanje, a znamo, psihijatrija zna, da su samo 1 posto Amerikanaca sadisti. U redu. Evo podataka. Nisu mogli više promašiti. Dvije trećine idu sve do 450 volti. A to je bila samo jedna studija. Milgram je proveo više od 16 studija. I pogledajte ovo. U studiji 16, gdje vidite nekoga poput vas kako ide do kraja, 90 posto ispitanika ide do kraja. U petoj studiji, ako vidite ljude da se pobune, 90 posto ih se pobuni. Što je sa ženama? Studija 13: ne razlikuju se od muškaraca. Tako je Milgrom kvantificirao zlo kao spremnost ljudi da se slijepo pokore vlasti, da idu sve do 450 volti. A to je poput upravljača ljudske prirode. Upravljača u smislu da gotovo svakoga možete napraviti potpuno poslušnim od većine do nikoga.
What are the external parallels? For all research is artificial. What's the validity in the real world? 912 American citizens committed suicide or were murdered by family and friends in Guyana jungle in 1978, because they were blindly obedient to this guy, their pastor -- not their priest -- their pastor, Reverend Jim Jones. He persuaded them to commit mass suicide. And so, he's the modern Lucifer effect, a man of God who becomes the Angel of Death. Milgram's study is all about individual authority to control people. Most of the time, we are in institutions, so the Stanford Prison Study is a study of the power of institutions to influence individual behavior. Interestingly, Stanley Milgram and I were in the same high school class in James Monroe in the Bronx, 1954.
Ali koje su vanjske usporedbe? Jer svako je istraživanje umjetno. Koja je valjanost u stvarnom svijetu? 912 američkih građana počinilo je samoubojstvo ili su ih ubili članovi obitelji i prijatelji u džungli u Gvajani 1978. zbog slijepe poslušnosti prema ovom čovjeku, svojem pastoru. Ne svojem svećeniku. Svojem pastoru, velečasnom Jimu Jonesu. Na njegov nagovor počinili su masovno samoubojstvo. I tako je upravo on protagonist suvremenog Luciferovog efekta. Božji čovjek koji je postao anđeo smrti. Milgramova studija govori upravo o moći pojedinca da upravlja ljudima. Većinu vremena provodimo u institucijama, stoga je studija o stanfordskom zatvoru zapravo studija o utjecaju institucija na ponašanje pojedinca. Zanimljivo je da smo Stanley Milgrom i ja bili u istom razredu u srednjoj školi James Monroe u Bronxu, 1954.
I did this study with my graduate students, especially Craig Haney -- and it also began work with an ad. We had a cheap, little ad, but we wanted college students for a study of prison life. 75 people volunteered, took personality tests. We did interviews. Picked two dozen: the most normal, the most healthy. Randomly assigned them to be prisoner and guard. So on day one, we knew we had good apples. I'm going to put them in a bad situation.
Ovo istraživanje na kojemu sam radio sa svojim studentima, posebno Craigom Haneyjem, također je započelo oglasom. Nismo imali novca pa smo postavili jeftini maleni oglas, a željeli smo studente koji bi sudjelovali u istraživanju o zatvorskom životu. 75 ljudi se dobrovoljno javilo i ispunilo testove osobnosti. Intervjuirali smo ih. Izabrali smo dvadeset četvero ljudi, najnormalnijih, najzdravijih. Nasumično su im dodijeljene uloge zatvorenika i čuvara. Tako smo prvog dana znali da imamo dobre jabuke. Dovest ćemo ih u lošu situaciju.
And secondly, we know there's no difference between the boys who will be guards and those who will be prisoners. To the prisoners, we said, "Wait at home. The study will begin Sunday." We didn't tell them that the city police were going to come and do realistic arrests.
Drugo, poznato je da nema razlike između mladića koji će biti čuvari i mladića koji će biti zatvorenici. Mladićima koji će biti zatvorenici rekli smo: "Čekajte kod kuće u spavaonicama.Studija će započeti u nedjelju." Nismo im rekli da će doći gradska policija i izvršiti realistična uhićenja.
(Video) (Music)
[Day 1]
Student: A police car pulls up in front, and a cop comes to the front door, and knocks, and says he's looking for me. So they, right there, you know, they took me out the door, they put my hands against the car. It was a real cop car, it was a real policeman, and there were real neighbors in the street, who didn't know that this was an experiment. And there was cameras all around and neighbors all around. They put me in the car, then they drove me around Palo Alto. They took me to the basement of the police station. Then they put me in a cell. I was the first one to be picked up, so they put me in a cell, which was just like a room with a door with bars on it. You could tell it wasn't a real jail. They locked me in there, in this degrading little outfit. They were taking this experiment too seriously.
[Čovjek na snimci] policijski automobil zaustavlja se ispred ulaza i policajac dolazi do prednjih vrata i pokuca i kaže da traži mene. Tako su, na licu mjesta, znate, odveli me van, prislonili mi ruke na auto. Policijski auto je bio stvaran, policajac je bio stvaran, i na ulici su bili stvarni susjedi koji nisu znali da se radi o eksperimentu. Svuda su uokolo bili fotoaparati i susjedi. Posjeli su me u auto i zatim vozili po Palo Altu. Odveli su me u policijsku postaju, u podrum policijske postaje. Tada su me zatvorili u ćeliju. Bio sam prvi kojega su doveli pa su me zatvorili u ćeliju koja je bila poput obične prostorije i imala vrata s rešetkama. Moglo se vidjeti da to nije bio pravi zatvor. Zaključali su me tamo, obučenog u neku ponižavajuću odoru. Preozbiljno su shvatili eksperiment.
Here are the prisoners, who are going to be dehumanized, they'll become numbers. Here are the guards with the symbols of power and anonymity. Guards get prisoners to clean the toilet bowls out with their bare hands, to do other humiliating tasks. They strip them naked. They sexually taunt them. They begin to do degrading activities, like having them simulate sodomy. You saw simulating fellatio in soldiers in Abu Ghraib. My guards did it in five days. The stress reaction was so extreme that normal kids we picked because they were healthy had breakdowns within 36 hours. The study ended after six days, because it was out of control. Five kids had emotional breakdowns.
Evo zatvorenika koji će biti dehumanizirani. Postati će brojevi. Ovo su čuvari sa simbolima moći i anonimnosti. Čuvari tjeraju zatvorenike na čišćenje WC-a golim rukama i na druge ponižavajuće zadatake. Skidaju ih gole. Izlažu ih spolnim uvredama. Počinju s ponižavajućim aktivnostima, poput tjeranja zatvorenika na simuliranje sodomije. Vidjeli ste simuliranje oralnog seksa kod vojnika u Abu Ghraibu. Mojim je čuvarima za to trebalo pet dana. Reakcija na stres je bila toliko ekstremna da su normalni mladići koje smo izabrali jer su bili zdravi doživjeli živčani slom za manje od 36 sati. Istraživanje je završilo nakon šest dana jer je izmaklo kontroli. Petero ljudi doživjelo je emocionalni slom.
Does it make a difference if warriors go to battle changing their appearance or not? If they're anonymous, how do they treat their victims? In some cultures, they go to war without changing their appearance. In others, they paint themselves like "Lord of the Flies." In some, they wear masks. In many, soldiers are anonymous in uniform. So this anthropologist, John Watson, found 23 cultures that had two bits of data. Do they change their appearance? 15. Do they kill, torture, mutilate? 13. If they don't change their appearance, only one of eight kills, tortures or mutilates. The key is in the red zone. If they change their appearance, 12 of 13 -- that's 90 percent -- kill, torture, mutilate. And that's the power of anonymity.
Je li svejedno mijenjaju li ratnici koji idu u bitku svoj izgled ili ne? Utječe li njihova anonimnost na način na koji postupaju sa svojim žrtvama? Znamo da ljudi u nekim kulturama pri odlasku u rat ne mijenjaju svoj izgled. U drugim kulturama ljudi koriste boje poput likova iz Gospodara muha. U nekim kulturama nose maske. U mnogima, vojnici su anonimni u uniformama. Tako je antropolog John Watson izdvojio 23 kulturne skupine i dvije informacije o svakoj od njih. Mijenjaju li izgled? 15. Ubijaju li, muče, sakate? 13. Od skupina koje ne mijenjaju svoj izgled samo jedna od osam ubija, muči ili sakati. Ključ je u crvenoj zoni. Ako mijenjaju izgled, 12 od 13 -- to je 90 posto -- ubija, muči, sakati. To je moć anonimnosti.
So what are the seven social processes that grease the slippery slope of evil? Mindlessly taking the first small step. Dehumanization of others. De-individuation of self. Diffusion of personal responsibility. Blind obedience to authority. Uncritical conformity to group norms. Passive tolerance of evil through inaction, or indifference.
Kojih je to onda sedam društvenih procesa koji podmazuju sklisku padinu zla? Bezumno poduzimanje prvog malenog koraka. Dehumanizacija drugih. Deindividualizacija sebe. Raspršenje osobne odgovornosti. Slijepa poslušnost autoriteta. Nekritično prihvaćanje grupnih normi. Pasivno toleriranje zla nedjelovanjem ili indiferentnošću.
And it happens when you're in a new or unfamiliar situation. Your habitual response patterns don't work. Your personality and morality are disengaged. "Nothing is easier than to denounce the evildoer; nothing more difficult than understanding him," Dostoyevsky. Understanding is not excusing. Psychology is not excuse-ology.
A to se događa u novim ili nepoznatim situacijama. Uobičajeni uzorci reagiranja ne djeluju. Vaša ličnost i moral se razdvajaju. "Ništa nije lakše nego osuditi onoga koji čini zlo, ništa teže nego razumjeti ga", govori nam Dostojevski. Razumijevanje nije opravdavanje. Psihologija nije "izgovorologija".
So social and psychological research reveals how ordinary, good people can be transformed without the drugs. You don't need it. You just need the social-psychological processes. Real world parallels? Compare this with this. James Schlesinger -- I'm going to end with this -- says, "Psychologists have attempted to understand how and why individuals and groups who usually act humanely can sometimes act otherwise in certain circumstances." That's the Lucifer effect. And he goes on to say, "The landmark Stanford study provides a cautionary tale for all military operations." If you give people power without oversight, it's a prescription for abuse. They knew that, and let that happen.
Društvena i psihološka istraživanja otkrivaju kako je obične dobre ljude moguće transformirati bez utjecaja droge. Nepotrebna je. Potrebni su samo socio-psihološki procesi. Usporedbe sa stvarnim svijetom? Usporedite ovo sa sljedećim. James Schlesinger -- morati ću završiti s ovime -- kaže: "Psiholozi su pokušavali shvatiti kako i zašto pojedinci i grupe koje obično djeluju čovječno mogu ponekad, u drugačijim okolnostima, djelovati drugačije." To je Luciferov efekt. Nastavlja: "Značajna stanfordska studija predstavlja opomenu za sve vojne operacije." Ako ljudima date moć bez nadzora, to je recept za zlostavljanje. Oni su to znali i dopustili da se dogodi. Još jedno izlaganje, istražni izvještaj generala Faya,
So another report, an investigative report by General Fay, says the system is guilty. In this report, he says it was the environment that created Abu Ghraib, by leadership failures that contributed to the occurrence of such abuse, and because it remained undiscovered by higher authorities for a long period of time. Those abuses went on for three months. Who was watching the store? The answer is nobody, I think on purpose. He gave the guards permission to do those things, and they knew nobody was ever going to come down to that dungeon.
okrivljuje sustav, a u ovom izvješću Fay govori da je okruženje koje je nastalo u Abu Ghraibu zbog neuspješnog vodstva bilo to što je doprinijelo nastanku takvog zlostavljanja, to i činjenica da je ono dugo ostalo neotkriveno od strane vlasti. Zlostavljanja su trajala tri mjeseca. Tko je pazio na njih? Odgovor je - nitko, i ja mislim - namjerno. "Nitko" je dao čuvarima dopuštenje da čine sve one stvari, a oni su znali da se nitko nikad neće spustiti dolje u tamnicu.
So you need a paradigm shift in all of these areas. The shift is away from the medical model that focuses only on the individual. The shift is toward a public health model that recognizes situational and systemic vectors of disease. Bullying is a disease. Prejudice is a disease. Violence is a disease. Since the Inquisition, we've been dealing with problems at the individual level. It doesn't work. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn says, "The line between good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being." That means that line is not out there. That's a decision that you have to make, a personal thing.
Zato je potreban pomak paradigme u svim ovim područjima. Pomak koji je udaljen od medicinskog modela, a koji se usredotočuje samo na pojedinca. Pomak prema modelu javnog zdravstva koji prepoznaje situacijske i sustavske čimbenika bolesti. Zadirkivanje je bolest. Predrasue su bolest. Nasilje je bolest. Još se od inkvizicije problemima bavimo na individualnoj razini. I znate što? To ne funkcionira. Aleksandar Solženjicin rekao je da linija koja dijeli dobro od zla zarezuje kroz srce svakog ljudskog bića. To znači da granica nije negdje vani. To je nešto što morate odlučiti. To je osobna stvar. Zato želim brzo završiti pozitivnom idejom
So I want to end very quickly on a positive note. Heroism as the antidote to evil, by promoting the heroic imagination, especially in our kids, in our educational system. We want kids to think, "I'm a hero in waiting, waiting for the right situation to come along, and I will act heroically. My whole life, I'm now going to focus away from evil -- that I've been in since I was a kid -- to understanding heroes.
junaštva kao protuotrova za zlo. Promičući junački način razmišljanja, posebice kod djece, u obrazovnom sustavu želimo da djeca razmišljaju - Ja sam budući junak, čekam da naiđe prava situacija i ja ću se ponijeti junački. Cijeli moj život sada će se odmaknuti od zla u kojem sam bio od djetinjstva i okrenuti prema razumijevanju junaka.
Banality of heroism. It's ordinary people who do heroic deeds. It's the counterpoint to Hannah Arendt's "Banality of Evil." Our traditional societal heroes are wrong, because they are the exceptions. They organize their life around this. That's why we know their names. Our kids' heroes are also wrong models for them, because they have supernatural talents. We want our kids to realize most heroes are everyday people, and the heroic act is unusual. This is Joe Darby. He was the one that stopped those abuses you saw, because when he saw those images, he turned them over to a senior investigating officer. He was a low-level private, and that stopped it. Was he a hero? No. They had to put him in hiding, because people wanted to kill him, and then his mother and his wife. For three years, they were in hiding.
Njihovo poimanje junaštva su obični ljudi koji čine junačka djela. To je suprotnost Hannah Arendtinoj Banalnosti zla. Junaci naših tradicionalnih društava su pogrešni jer su iznimke. Organiziraju cijeli svoj život oko toga. Zato znamo njihova imena. A junaci naše djece istovremeno su im i uzori jer imaju nadnaravne moći. Želimo da naša djeca shvate da su većina junaka obični ljudi, a da je junaštvo neobičan čin. Ovo je Joe Darby. On je taj koji je zaustavio zlostavljanja koja ste vidjeli, jer kada je vidio one slike, predao ih je nadređenom istražitelju. On je bio običan vojnik i to što je napravio bilo je dovoljno da zaustavi zlostavljanja. Je li bio junak? Nije. Morali su ga skrivati, jer su ga ljudi htjeli ubiti, zatim njegovu majku i njegovu suprugu. Tri godine bili su u bijegu.
This is the woman who stopped the Stanford Prison Study. When I said it got out of control, I was the prison superintendent. I didn't know it was out of control. I was totally indifferent. She saw that madhouse and said, "You know what, it's terrible what you're doing to those boys. They're not prisoners nor guards, they're boys, and you are responsible." And I ended the study the next day. The good news is I married her the next year.
Ovo je žena koja je zaustavila studiju Stanfordskog zatvora. Kad sam rekao da je izmakla kontroli, ja sam bio upravitelj zatvora. Nisam znao da je izvan kontrole. Bio sam potpuno ravnodušnan. Ona je sišla, vidjela cijelu ludnicu i rekla: "Znaš što, grozno je to što radiš onim mladićima. Oni nisu zatvorenici, oni nisu čuvari, oni su mladići, a vi ste odgovorni." I sutradan sam prekinuo studiju. Dobra vijest je da sam se oženio njome sljedeće godine.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
(Applause)
(Aplauz)
I just came to my senses, obviously.
Očito sam se opametio.
So situations have the power to do [three things]. But the point is, this is the same situation that can inflame the hostile imagination in some of us, that makes us perpetrators of evil, can inspire the heroic imagination in others. It's the same situation and you're on one side or the other. Most people are guilty of the evil of inaction, because your mother said, "Don't get involved. Mind your own business." And you have to say, "Mama, humanity is my business."
Dakle, situacije imaju moć da, putem -- no to je ista situacija koja može potaknuti neprijateljske misli u nekima od nas, koja nas čini počiniteljima zla, može nadahnuti junačke misli u drugima. To je ista situacija. A vi ste ili na jednoj ili na drugoj strani. Većina ljudi kriva je za zlo pasivnosti, jer vam je majka rekla: "Nemoj se uplitati, gledaj svoja posla." A vi morate reći: "Mama, čovječnost jest moj posao."
So the psychology of heroism is -- we're going to end in a moment -- how do we encourage children in new hero courses, that I'm working on with Matt Langdon -- he has a hero workshop -- to develop this heroic imagination, this self-labeling, "I am a hero in waiting," and teach them skills. To be a hero, you have to learn to be a deviant, because you're always going against the conformity of the group. Heroes are ordinary people whose social actions are extraordinary. Who act.
Psihologija junaštva je -- uskoro ćemo završiti -- kako potaknuti djecu u novim programima junaštva, na kojima radim sa Mattom Langdonom -- on vodi radionicu junaštva -- da razviju ove junačke misli, to samo-označavanje, "Ja sam budući junak", te ih učimo vještinama. Da bi ste postali junakom morate naučiti ponašati se devijantno, jer ćete uvijek ići protiv očekivanja grupe. Junaci su obični ljudi čije su društvene radnje izvanredne. Oni djeluju.
The key to heroism is two things. You have to act when other people are passive. B: You have to act socio-centrically, not egocentrically. And I want to end with a known story about Wesley Autrey, New York subway hero. Fifty-year-old African-American construction worker standing on a subway. A white guy falls on the tracks. The subway train is coming. There's 75 people there. You know what? They freeze. He's got a reason not to get involved. He's black, the guy's white, and he's got two kids. Instead, he gives his kids to a stranger, jumps on the tracks, puts the guy between the tracks, lays on him, the subway goes over him. Wesley and the guy -- 20 and a half inches height. The train clearance is 21 inches. A half an inch would have taken his head off. And he said, "I did what anyone could do," no big deal to jump on the tracks.
Ključ junaštva su dvije stvari. A: Morate djelovati kada su drugi ljudi pasivni. B: Morate djelovati sociocentrično, a ne egocentrično. Želim završiti pričom koju neki od vas znaju, o Wesleyu Autreyu, junaku njujorške podzemne željeznice. 50-godišnji afroamerički građevinski radnik. Stoji na stanici podzemne željeznice u New Yorku; bijelac pada na tračnice. Podzemni vlak dolazi. 75 ljudi je tamo. Znate što se dogodilo? Svi su se skamenili. On ima razlog da se ne uplete. On je crnac, čovjek u nevolji je bijelac, a uz to on ima i dvoje male djece. Umjesto toga, on predaje djecu strancu, skače na tračnice, stavlja čovjeka između tračnica, legne na njega, i vlak prelazi preko njih. Wesley i on zajedno su visoki 20.5 inča. Vlak je na visini od 21 inča. Još pola inča i odrezao bi mu glavu. On kaže: "Napravio sam ono što bi svatko mogao napraviti, nije velika stvar skočiti na tračnice."
And the moral imperative is "I did what everyone should do." And so one day, you will be in a new situation. Take path one, you're going to be a perpetrator of evil. Evil, meaning you're going to be Arthur Andersen. You're going to cheat, or you're going to allow bullying. Path two, you become guilty of the evil of passive inaction. Path three, you become a hero. The point is, are we ready to take the path to celebrating ordinary heroes, waiting for the right situation to come along to put heroic imagination into action? Because it may only happen once in your life, and when you pass it by, you'll always know, I could have been a hero and I let it pass me by. So the point is thinking it and then doing it.
A moralni imperativ je "Ja sam napravio ono što bi svatko trebao napraviti." I tako jednog dana, naći ćete se novoj situaciji. Odaberite prvi put, i bit ćete počinitelj zla. Zlo, što znači da ćete biti Arthur Anderson. Varat ćete ili ćete dopustiti nasilje. Drugi put: bit ćete krivi za zlo pasivnog nedjelovanja. Treći put: postat ćete junak. Poanta je u tome jesmo li spremni poći putem slavljenja običnih junaka, čekajući pravu situaciju kako bismo pokrenuli svoje junačke misli? Jer to vam se može dogoditi samo jednom u životu, a ako propustite priliku, uvijek ćete znati - Mogao sam biti junak, a propustio sam priliku. Dakle, poanta je zamisliti to, a onda i napraviti.
So I want to thank you. Thank you. Let's oppose the power of evil systems at home and abroad, and let's focus on the positive. Advocate for respect of personal dignity, for justice and peace, which sadly our administration has not been doing.
Zato vam želim zahvaliti. Hvala vam. Hvala vam. Suprostavimo se moći zlih sustava u domovini i inozemstvu, i usredotočimo se na pozitivno. Zalažite se za poštivanje osobnog dostojanstva, za pravdu i mir, što, nažalost, naša vlada ne radi.
Thanks so much.
Puno vam hvala.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)