Compare And Contrast Stanford Prison Experiment And Philip Zimbardo

In August of 1971, psychology professor Philip Zimbardo conducted the Stanford prison experiment, which was funded by the U.S military to investigate the causes of dissension between military guards and prisoners. As the experiment commenced, the participating college students adapted to their roles as guards and detainees in the prison far beyond the expectations of Zimbardo. Authoritarian measures were enforced harshly upon those who were the prisoners, with some even subjected to psychological torture. However, many of the prisoners accepted this treatment passively, allowing psychological abuse and harassment to be inflicted. The experiment concluded that situation, rather than an individual's personality, affected the participants' behavior.

This reassurance was able to earn the participation of just over 60% of those being studied to finish out the experiment. Both experiments conclude that people are not necessarily evil, but are products of situational circumstances. In some instances, people can genuinely believe that they are doing good, while in reality their actions can be regarded as villainous. Good and evil are terms that are relative and interchangeable in many instances. Because of the complexity of circumstances, a single event cannot be characterized as simply black or white. There are some actions where the end may justify the means, as evil acts may be done in the name of a good cause; there are instances where acts may seem cold, or inherently wrong, but are done for the protection of oneself or others around them; there are some acts we deem as positive or negative, but in reality they are just accidents or

In the Great Gatsby, Myrtle is murdered, as she is hit by Daisy in a hit and run, and in the ensuing chaos of what happens after, with Gatsby’s murder because it is believed by Myrtle's husband that he is the one who killed her and followed by George’s suicide, Tom and Daisy flee. Many would see this evil, they were directly responsible for the death of 3 people and hid behind their wealth and status to avoid having to deal with the aftermath and being caught. But when looked at if from a different view they are simply protecting themselves. Tom sends George after Gatsby to protect Daisy’s life and to make sure she would not be caught. Nick goes on about to Tom’s actions stating, “ I couldn’t forgive him or like him, but I saw that what he had done was, to him, entirely justified. It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy – they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made…” (179). Their actions may be wrong, but to them, they were completely justified in accordance with their personal moral code, they protected themselves first and sought after the