Yah, Latane and Darley is/are the main reference for the Bobbit chapter....

C.

Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> here is the straight poop from my colleague Jim Laird. 
>  
> Nick
>  
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Research Associate, Redfish Group, Santa Fe, NM ([EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> Professor of Psychology and Ethology, Clark University 
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
>  
>  
>  
>  
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Jim Laird <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>     *To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>     *Sent:* 5/25/2007 4:02:13 PM
>     *Subject:* RE: [FRIAM] [WedTech] Teachers drop the Holocaust to
>     avoid offendingMuslims|theDaily Mail
>
>     Sure, by all means.  (You always did know how to influence me.)
>
>      
>
>     James D. Laird
>
>     Professor of Psychology
>
>     Clark University
>
>     Worcester , MA 01610
>
>     Tel: 508-793-7272
>
>     FAX: 508-793-7265
>
>     * From: * Nicholas Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     *Sent:* Friday, May 25, 2007 5:27 PM
>     *To:* Jim Laird
>     *Subject:* RE: [FRIAM] [WedTech] Teachers drop the Holocaust to
>     avoid offendingMuslims|theDaily Mail
>
>      
>
>     May I have your permission to forward this to the list?  Exactly
>     what I was hoping for. 
>
>      
>
>     Nick
>
>      
>
>      
>
>         ----- Original Message -----
>
>         * From: * Jim Laird <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>         * To: * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>         * Sent: * 5/25/2007 3:17:27 PM
>
>         * Subject: * RE: [FRIAM] [WedTech] Teachers drop the Holocaust
>         to avoid offendingMuslims|theDaily Mail
>
>          
>
>         Nick,
>
>                     There is a great book on this phenomenon, called I
>         think The unresponsive bystander. By Bib Latane and John
>         Darley.  From the 70s I would guess.  Of course, an actual,
>         real life emergency is likely to be multiply determined and
>         complex.  But L & Ds pitch was that there were at least two
>         factors at work in the Kitty Genovese case. One was that many
>         of the bystanders were aware that other people had also seen
>         the event, and so assumed that others would have called 911
>         already.  To test this possibility, in a variety of
>         situations, they led people to believe that someone was hurt,
>         or having a seizure, or otherwise in trouble, and that there
>         were either no other potential helpers, 1 other, or 4 or 5
>         others. (Of course, the potential helpers were confederates,
>         or sometimes nothing more than a tape recorder, but the real
>         participants didnt know that.)  When the real participant was
>         the only potential helper, 100% helped.  When there was 1
>         other, most but not all people helped, and when there were 4
>         or 5 others, even fewer of the real participants helped.  L &
>         D had lots of observations to support the view that the
>         nonhelpers believed the emergency was real, and were
>         concerned. They just didnt help. L & D called it diffusion of
>         responsibility, I think.
>
>                     They also observed that emergencies are by their
>         nature often ambiguous, so that people may relay on others to
>         decide if there is a problem. One of their very cute studies
>         of this aspect involved sitting real participants down with a
>         bunch of questionnaires, on a high floor in a Manhattan
>         building.  While they worked on the questionnaires, smoke
>         began to billow from the ventilation ducts.  They observed
>         that when people were alone, they noticed the smoke quickly,
>         and immediately went to tell someone about it.  When in
>         groups, of either confederates or other real participants,
>         they were slower to notice the smoke, and when they did,
>         appeared to check their neighbors, who were industriously
>         working on the questionnaires , so they in effect shrugged and
>         went back to their own questionnaires.  The mere presence of
>         others dramatically reduced noticing an emergency, and dealing
>         with it. 
>
>                     In the Milgram studies, the participants did not
>         just assume a Yale professor wouldnt really hurt someone.  To
>         test this, Milgrim ran one study in a sleazy motel in
>         Bridgeport .  Obedience dropper from 65% to something like
>         40%, but that is still pretty appalling.  In other variations,
>         participants were required to give electric shocks to a cute
>         puppywho yelped and leaped when they did so, but they did it. 
>         In others, they hurt themselves, by for instance giving
>         themselves blasts of  white noise which was actually harmless,
>         but which they were told would damage their hearing.  Or eat
>         disgustingly bitter quinine soaked crackers. 
>
>                     Hope this is helpful.  I couldnt gather what the
>         discussion was about.
>
>                     And I certainly hope we are still colleagues.  You
>         just live farther away.
>
>                     Jim
>
>          
>
>                    
>
>          
>
>         James D. Laird
>
>         Professor of Psychology
>
>         Clark University
>
>         Worcester , MA 01610
>
>         Tel: 508-793-7272
>
>         FAX: 508-793-7265
>
>         * From: * Nicholas Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         *Sent:* Friday, May 25, 2007 2:44 AM
>         *To:* Bill Eldridge; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity
>         Coffee Group
>         *Cc:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] [WedTech] Teachers drop the Holocaust
>         to avoid offendingMuslims|theDaily Mail
>
>          
>
>         Bill, thanks for your many clarifications. 
>
>          
>
>         I apologize for my crappy memory.
>
>          
>
>         Two weeks ago, we were sitting around a family party chatting
>         and watching two little kids roughhousing.  They were behaving
>         just on the edge of dangerous, and any one of the adults in
>         the room would have been seen as authorized by the others to
>         rein them in, including two parents, two grandparents  of the
>         younger child, one parent and various aunts and uncles of the
>         older child.  In a millisecond, the older child was down with
>         a badly broken upper arm.  Required pins, surgery, the whole
>         nine yards. 
>
>          
>
>         There was not an adult in that room who did not report that
>         she or he would have stopped the kids long before if other
>         adults had not been there.  This was not said in an
>         exculpatory way by anybody.  Nobody took blame in this case as
>         a zero sum game.  We we did seem to feel, rightly or wrongly,
>         that social groups have a certain viscosity that we felt
>         restrained within a membrane of group inaction. 
>
>          
>
>         Nick
>
>          
>
>          
>
>          
>
>          
>
>             ----- Original Message -----
>
>             * From: * Bill Eldridge <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>             * To: * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>             <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;The Friday Morning
>             Applied Complexity Coffee Group <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>             * Cc: * [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>             * Sent: * 5/25/2007 4:15:32 AM
>
>             * Subject: * Re: [FRIAM] [WedTech] Teachers drop the
>             Holocaust to avoid offendingMuslims|theDaily Mail
>
>              
>
>
>             The link I sent with this notes that of the 38 people who
>             saw Kitty "get clobbered"
>             only a couple would have seen an actual knife or had an
>             idea that she was in real danger
>             or seen anything (and many of the tenants were old and
>             would have had a tough time
>             figuring out what was happening when they'd just been
>             waken at 3am, the streetlight
>             was dim, etc.)
>
>             Most just heard a noise in front of a usually noisy bar
>             (this night it closed early after a fight),
>             some saw a woman get up off the ground and walk away (if
>             slowly), perhaps a few
>             actually saw the man by her before he ran away and she got
>             up and walked away.
>             She apparently yelled something one time, didn't keep
>             screaming. (Of course if she
>             was in bad shape she quite likely couldn't have kept
>             screaming but she did walk away).
>             One who realized she was in danger said she called the
>             police, but in those pre-911
>             days lots of calls were lost and callers were regular ly
>             abused for annoying the police
>             with non-serious matters (you had to identify yourself to
>             report a crime back then).
>             One observer called the police but got scared to speak and
>             hung up. Another was
>             very very drunk and didn't want to deal with the police.
>             For those that didn't realize
>             it was a knife stabbing, they would have reported an
>             assault, which would have brought
>             out the police in about an hour, too late to help Kitty.
>
>             When the murderer did come back and find Kitty, it was
>             behind the building next door,
>             not the same apartment building. The link also notes that
>             a lot of the "witnesses" were old
>             people who wouldn't have seen or heard well, and would
>             have been in no position for
>             heroics, only to call the police. But for most, the
>             incident ended when they were woken
>             up by a yell, they looked to the window, they saw a woman
>             get up and walk away.
>             In short, a ty pical non-event in noisy tumultous New York .
>
>             Of course the NY Times pre sented this very differently,
>             and thus the hyper-example
>             of citizen apathy. But I also think of cases like these in
>             the middle of civilization and
>             heavy news coverage, and can only imagine how distorted
>             our reporting of events
>             in the Middle East, Asia or Africa is.
>
>             [Not long ago I read someone's evaluation of the Third
>             Wave anecdote from the
>             Whole Earth Catalog. In this case it turns out that it
>             wasn't nearly the big to-do
>             that the teacher made it out to be, but the teacher
>             basically made a career out of
>             repeating this "informative lesson" of how Nazism could
>             have started, even sucking
>             in Stewart Brand. The more important lesson there being,
>             "How could this bogus version
>             of events stick around for so long without anyone
>             questioning it as obvious bullshit?"
>             Which poss ibly relates back to the original thread - in
>             my school we didn't study the
>             holocaust even though I read "Rise & Fall..." for summer
>             reading - perhaps the
>             schools actua lly thought there were lots of other topics
>             they could teach well,
>             rather than simply caving to possible concerns about
>             Moslem students as the paper
>             asserts.]
>
>             Nicholas Thompson wrote:
>
>             Bill,
>
>              
>
>             I still think the two are related.  The people who watched
>             kitty genovese get clobbered assumed a social fabric in
>             which women dont get beaten to death under their windows
>             and didnt think it their particular responsibility to try
>             to save her life.   The milgrim subjects assumed that the
>             world was not the sort of place where experimenters allow
>             participants to actually torture one another.  And, in
>             fact, they were right.  Well, in that particular instance. 
>
>              
>
>             My former colleague, James Laird, who does research about
>             this sort of stuff, thinks I am a real bonehead about it,
>             so you neednt take my views too seriously.
>
>              
>
>             Nick
>
>              
>
>              
>
>                 ----- Original Message -----
>
>                 * From: * Bill Eldridge <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>                 * To: * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>                 <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;The Friday Morning
>                 Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>                 <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>                 * Cc: * Carl Tollander <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>                 * Sent: * 5/24/2007 8:48:16 PM
>
>                 * Subject: * Re: [FRIAM] [WedTech] Teachers drop the
>                 Holocaust to avoid offendingMuslims|the Daily Mail
>
>                  
>
>                 Nicholas Thompson wrote:
>
>                  Carl,    
>
>                      
>
>                  I am trying to get my Psych 101 in order:  Was the kitty 
> genovese incident   
>
>                  the one that led to that horrendous series of experiments 
> that demonstrate   
>
>                  that if    
>
>                   you give people a shock console (or what they THINK is a 
> shock   
>
>                  console) and ask them politely to do so, they will 
> cheerfully use shocks   
>
>                  that they think are lethal, just so long as they are told 
> to?     
>
>                       
>
>                 Unfortunately not - it's about how neighbors ignore
>                 horrible things going on in their insular world.
>                 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Genovese
>
>                 What it really might represent is how facts are
>                 distorted to make events look worse than they
>                 are, especially when a newspaper's involved:
>
>                 http://www.oldkewgardens.com/ss-nytimes-3.html
>
>                 I use to live across from a bar, and one night I saw
>                 two guys squaring off on a sidewalk and
>                 a third come from behind and break a bottle over one's
>                 head. I was on the phone to 911 in
>                 a flash, and by the time I'd quickly described the
>                 scene unfolding to the dispatcher, the 3 of them
>                 were giving each other hugs and going arm-in-arm back
>                 into the bar to drink some more.
>
>                 In a similarly bad neighborhood where I flipped my
>                 bike and broke my collarbone, I was
>                 staggering around in a great deal of pain, but got a
>                 car to stop (cautiously) late at night in just a few
>                 minutes,
>                 and they were a great help in getting me to a
>                 hospital. Good Samaritans still exist.
>
>                 I'm intrigued by one line in the article, "But the
>                 same department deliberately avoided teaching the Crusades
>                 at Key Stage 3 (11- to 14-year-olds) because their
>                 balanced treatment of the topic would have challenged
>                 what was taught in some local mosques." It makes it
>                 sound like there's a good balanced way of explaining
>                 the Crusades as anything but a good deal of
>                 Euro-thuggery intent on dealing a good come-uppance to
>                 the well-entrenched local population some thousands of
>                 miles away. Would make for good entertainment
>                 to hear this rationale at least.
>
>                 Personally, I think most grade school teachers are
>                 better off trying to teach simpler, les s contentious
>                 topics
>                 well (even if ignoring whether Columbus was actual ly
>                 Catalonian and other possibly interesting side issues)
>                 instead of being too focused on fuzzy goals of
>                 teaching tolerance and sensitivity, as if there were much
>                 of that in history.
>
>                 Regarding humor and genocide, I think of the Nazis as
>                 a pretty humorless, mystical bunch.
>                 Somehow it didn't seem to deter them from genocide.
>
>                  reminds me of the stoners that jg showed us at arrowhead, 
> who would run out   
>
>                  from the crowd, throw a stone, and then sink back into the 
> anonymity of the   
>
>                  crowd.    
>
>                       
>
>                      
>
>                  Thought experiment:  if all humor were forbidden, would 
> genocide be   
>
>                  possible???  In the Pleistocene context, with many small 
> groups in   
>
>                  desperate conflict for unpredictable resources, what was 
> humor FOR?     
>
>                      
>
>                  N   
>
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                       
>
>>                  [Original Message]   
>>                  From: Carl Tollander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <mailto:[EMAIL 
>> PROTECTED]>   
>>                  To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL 
>> PROTECTED]> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
>>                  Date: 5/24/2007 2:52:28 PM   
>>                  Subject: Re: [WedTech] Teachers drop the Ho   
>>                   locaust to avoid   
>>                         
>                  offending   Muslims|the Daily Mail   
>
>                       
>
>>                  Nick asks:   
>>                    >Do we need a science of Comparative Genocideology?   
>>                      
>>                  Closest I've seen that starts to address this is Chapter 15 
>> from Philip    
>>                  Bobbit's book "The Shield of Achilles"   
>>                  titled "The Kitty Genovese Incident and the War in   Bosnia 
>>  ".  I'll bring    
>>                  it by FRIAM.   
>>                      
>>                  C.   
>>                         
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                  ============================================================ 
>   
>
>                  FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv   
>
>                  Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at   St. John's   College     
>
>                  lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at 
> http://www.friam.org   
>
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                      
>
>                       
>
>                  
>
>                  
>
>                  
>
>              
>
>              
>
>              
>
>                  
>
>                  
>
>                  
>
>              ============================================================   
>
>              FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv   
>
>              Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at   St. John's   College     
>
>              lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org   
>
>              
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to