The Darley-Batson study (1973) suggests we very well might be capable of doing things we believe ourselves incapable of doing—based on the situation in which we find ourselves.
For the seminarians in question, would it have been a common occurrence to encounter a distressed or more likely apparently indigent individual in the environment of their campus? What conclusions would the seminarian likely have drawn simply from observing one more prone individual suffering from whatever unfortunate decisions that person had made in the last 24 hours or 10 years? Could the seminarian have simply thought “I will let somebody at the venue know about this poor individual, and I will come back after my presentation and check on them“?
Gladwell’s implication seems to be that if you do not stop immediately everything you are doing, and render all aid within your power, to the limits of your money and your life, then you are morally deficient. This seems infantile.
they needed a study for that? And if i recall the in GS the subjects were also priests who had legitimate (according to their dogma) reasons for not helping the victim. Demonstrates how the study reflects the wisdom of the parable. Though I do not suspect that was the point.
For the seminarians in question, would it have been a common occurrence to encounter a distressed or more likely apparently indigent individual in the environment of their campus? What conclusions would the seminarian likely have drawn simply from observing one more prone individual suffering from whatever unfortunate decisions that person had made in the last 24 hours or 10 years? Could the seminarian have simply thought “I will let somebody at the venue know about this poor individual, and I will come back after my presentation and check on them“?
Gladwell’s implication seems to be that if you do not stop immediately everything you are doing, and render all aid within your power, to the limits of your money and your life, then you are morally deficient. This seems infantile.
they needed a study for that? And if i recall the in GS the subjects were also priests who had legitimate (according to their dogma) reasons for not helping the victim. Demonstrates how the study reflects the wisdom of the parable. Though I do not suspect that was the point.
Interesting study, but do the circumstances change the persons “morality”, or did it reveal it?