Voting Station

Philip Zimbardo

Please vote to return to collections.

Philosopher

The Resume

    (March 23, 1933- )
    Born in New York City, New York
    Philip George Zimbardo
    Psychologist, Professor Emeritus at Stanford University (1968- )
    Conductor of the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment (1971)
    Founder/President of the Heroic Imagination Project (HIP)
    Author of 'The Lucifer Effect,' 'The Time Paradox,' and 'The Time Cure'
    Portrayed by Billy Crudup in 'The Stanford Prison Experiment' (2015)

Why he might be annoying:

    He abused the funds from his first research grant.
    His sleek features make him look like the original model for the Svengali-character. His main lecture topic is almost always 'evil.'
    He staged a mock prison experiment with extremely dehumanizing tactics used on the prisoners and then acted shocked when it went off the rails.
    He violated protocol prohibiting 'experiment bias' by injecting himself into the experiment, playing the 'prison's' superintendent.
    The most visible flaw in his experiment was that he had neither established a (seemingly basic) 'Dependent' nor 'Independent' Variable and faltered on the question whenever asked.
    He converted the university basement into a makeshift jailhouse, but the atmosphere of the jail was arguably more dehumanizing than its real-world counterpart (more readily resembling a concentration camp).
    This included fitting the prisoners with uncomfortable, ill-fitting smocks with stocking caps, making them wear a chain around their ankle, and even encouraging the guards to address their prisoners by their assigned numbers, instead of their names.
    By the sixth day, the experiment had gotten so out of control that at least one 'prisoner' was on the verge of a nervous breakdown from the guards' sadistic tendencies.
    Through all of it, Zimbardo seemed largely unconcerned and even proud/satisfied with the direction the experiment was going. Only when then-graduate student Christina Maslach, saw the inhumane conditions during a visit did Zimbardo relent and abort the operation (it helped that he had been dating her at the time).
    He was never formally charged with any wrongdoing, probably because the local police had assisted in 'arresting' and 'booking' the subjects in the first place, to make it seem 'realistic.'
    He was holier-than-thou enough to go and stick his nose into the Abu Ghraib case, after noticing similarities between his experiment and the prison, testifying against the 'systemic problems of military incarceration' (by that standard, he'd have been as worthy of prosecution for the abuse of his own 'subjects').

Why he might not be annoying:

    He comes from a family of Sicilian immigrants.
    He later expressed regret for his involvement in the Prison Experiment.
    His Experiment led to the implementation of rules to preclude any harmful treatment of participants.
    His Experiment led to the requirement of post-experimental 'debriefings,' at most universities, to ensure that participants were not harmed in any way by their experience in an experiment.
    He eventually married Christina Maslach, so evidently no hard feelings existed between the two over their initial 'disagreement.'
    He was one of three awarded the sarcastic Ig Nobel Award for Psychology for their report 'Politicians' Uniquely Simple Personalities' (2003).
    He received the Dagmar and Václav Havel Foundation Vision 97 Award in Prague (2005).
    He received the American Psychological Association Gold Medal for Lifetime Achievement in the Science of Psychology (2012).
    He stood up for Lynndie England and Chip Fredericks when the Bush Administration tried to throw them under the bus as 'bad apples.'
    He intellectualized the 'Lucifer Effect' theory, based on his findings, arguing that all 'good people' are susceptible to committing acts of horrendous evil in the correct setting (basically elaborating on Hannah Arendt's 'Banality of Evil' concept).

Credit: BoyWiththeGreenHair


Featured in the following Annoying Collections:

Year In Review:

    For 2024, as of last weekly ranking, Out of 1 Votes: 100% Annoying
    In 2023, Out of 1 Votes: 100% Annoying
    In 2022, Out of 1 Votes: 100% Annoying
    In 2021, Out of 7 Votes: 100% Annoying
    In 2020, Out of 1 Votes: 0% Annoying
    In 2019, Out of 4 Votes: 50.0% Annoying
    In 2018, Out of 8 Votes: 50.0% Annoying
    In 2017, Out of 9 Votes: 55.56% Annoying
    In 2016, Out of 9 Votes: 55.56% Annoying