4 ms·
I thought her real test would be that even if she put any sort of weapons on the table, no one would use it/them on her. That’s what made the experiment/art int
by stevofolife 3y ago
I thought her real test would be that even if she put any sort of weapons on the table, no one would use it/them on her. That’s what made the experiment/art interesting.
- magicalhippo 3y ago> That’s what made the experiment/art interesting. Why? Anyone seriously harming her would have committed a crime and get jailed. Even if it was done via remotely operated robots via some privacy-proof Tor network, so the participants could be absolutely sure not to be punished for their crime, and someone did seriously harm her, what did it accomplish? Not much, I'd say. Some people acting cruel when they can get away with it is expected behavior, just look at any kindergarten, not to mention the history books.
- stevofolife 3y agoSo then what’s the point of conducting this experiment when we already know the expected behaviour? My point is, most folks think the expected behaviour was the unexpected behaviour. I think it’s the other way around.