It's an inherent problem of the human condition, for some reason our own moral compass becomes dysfunctional once the authority and therefore responsibility is with someone else. It's the reason the Stanford Prison Experiment went so wrong once the professor took influence; we're not inherently evil, we (as a species) are just drawn to the current ruleset as dictated by our social group or idol of choice, especially if we get convinced it's somehow necessary.
Obviously not trying to abolish any guilt here, people are still responsible for what they're doing.
In the end we need way higher quality of education globally, better social security, rethink society (don't have children be on their own and make parents constantly burned out, god damn it) as well as political systems so they are designed to prevent any definition of an in- and out-group. Protections for who, what, where and how people are are great, and stuff like Germany's Article 1 is a good start, but it needs to go way further.
We need to design an environment that allows us humans to become more than we currently are if we ever want to get out of this cycle.
It confirms claims Zimbardo pushed participants towards the results he wanted, something he has disputed.
That's actually what I referred to, although I indeed didn't know know about the other statements by participants. Only knew about someone in Stanford digging through the files and realizing Zimbardo fucked everything up by pushing towards a certain outcome. Mmh…
I still stand with my statements about what we should do better though.
I'm with you on that. Most people all to thankfully give up their responsibility and do what they are told. The less they see the outcome of their actions the better (drone Pilots for example).
Anyway, i think the stanford prision experiment is a bad example for that though, because it also incorprates peer pressure and concludes that nobody will think twice doing harm to others, as long as they are told to do so by authority. Humanity isn't that bad I hope