when we talk about experiment here and here and here and…
we’re meaning it the sense of trying things out, alive/ness, experiencing .. everything as experiment..
we’re certainly not meaning – in any sense – turning people into objects..
Paulo Freire defines praxis in Pedagogy of the Oppressed as “reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it.” Through praxis, oppressed people can acquire a critical awareness of their own condition, and, with their allies, struggle for liberation.
p. 83: any situation in which some individuals prevent others from engaging in the process of inquiry is one of violence. the means used are not important; to alienate human beings from their own decision-making is to change them into objects.
so … a people experiment/experience/praxis…
Formerly, whenever anyone said the music I presented was experimental, I objected. It seemed to me that composers knew what they were doing, and that the experiments that had been made had taken place prior to the finished works, just as sketches are made before paintings and rehearsals precede performances. But, giving the matter further thought, I realized that there is ordinarily an essential difference between making a piece of music and hearing one. A composer knows his work as a woodsman knows a path he has traced and retraced, while a listener is confronted by the same work as one is in the woods by a plant he has never seen before.
Now, on the other hand, times have changed; music has changed; and I no longer object to the word “experimental.” I use it in fact to describe all the music that especially interests me and to which I am devoted, whether someone else wrote it or I myself did. What has happened is that I have become a listener and the music has become something to hear.
Many people, of course, have given up saying “experimental” about this new music. Instead, they either move to a halfway point and say “controversial” or depart to a greater distance and question whether this “music” is music at all.
– John Cage, Silence
loc 1165 – couldn’t help thinking evil captured in zimbardo’s filmed footage looked a bit hammy… what had really gone on in that basementon guard saying not true… only guard who really seemed to lose his mind was eshelman.. and he says – i faked it.1193 – so you faked it to give zimbarado a better study? – it was completely deliberate on my part, i planned it. i mapped it out. ..i thought i was doing something good at the time.
loc 1235 – Peter Gray.. published essay: why zimbardo’s prison experiment isn’t in my textbook……… this is a study of prisoners and guards, so their job clearly is to act like prisoners and guards – or, more accurately, to act out their stereotyped views of what prisoners and guards do.
Much research has shown that participants in psychological experiments are highly motivated to do what they believe the researchers want them to do.
The Stanford Prison Experiment was massively influential. We just learned it was a fraud.
The most famous psychological studies are often wrong, fraudulent, or outdated. Textbooks need to catch up.
Excellent @B_resnick piece on why it’s hard to trust the results of the Stanford Prison Experiment; why it hasn’t held up in replication; why some of its findings may be good; and generally why science is hard: https://t.co/Mmm5MN7s7B
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/pomeranian99/status/1007268158108028928
its findings were wrong. Very wrong. And not just due to its questionable ethics or lack of concrete data — but because of deceit.
guards in the experiment were coached to be cruel. It also shows that the experiment’s most memorable moment — of a prisoner descending into a screaming fit, proclaiming, “I’m burning up inside!” — was the result of the prisoner acting. “I took it as a kind of an improv exercise,” one of the guards told reporter Ben Blum. “I believed that I was doing what the researchers wanted me to do.”
In recent decades we as a society have been conducting a play-deprivation experiment with our children. Peter Gray, the play deficit