As a forensic psychologist I have an interest in both Milgram's work and the 
Unabomber. My recollection is that Kaczynski was a volunteer subject at the 
Murray lab in Harvard, but not for Stan Milgram. They did other poorly 
controlled 'research' there, which certainly would not obtain ethical approval 
now. 

Milgram's stood out as being reported sufficiently well to be interpreted,  and 
conducted more systematically. Although Milgram's work would also not now 
obtain ethical approval, it met the standards of the time. 

I may be wrong, but I think Milgram is in the clear on the Unabomber. A Mythoid 
rather than a Factoid?

Regards

David Glasgow 

On 21 Oct 2010, at 12:34, [email protected] wrote:

> Milgram's youngest and most vulnerable undergraduate research subjects was 
> extremely damaged by Milgram's emotionally abusive experiments.
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Reply via email to