Posted by Quintal on April 22, 2007, at 12:08:37
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyTO5vcFWuw
IF I HAD A HAMMER
words and music by Lee Hays, Quintal and Pete Seeger.If I had a hammer
I'd hammer in the morning
I'd hammer in the evening
All over this babble-land
I'd hammer out danger
I'd hammer out a warning
I'd hammer out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over babble-landIf I had a bell
I'd ring it in the morning
I'd ring it in the evening
All over this babble-land
I'd ring out danger
I'd ring out a warning
I'd ring out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over babble-landIf I had a song
I'd sing it in the morning
I'd sing it in the evening
All over this babble-land
I'd sing out danger
I'd sing out a warning
I'd sing out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over babble-landWell I've got a hammer
And I've got a bell
And I've got a song to sing
All over this land
It's the hammer of justice
It's the bell of freedom
It's the song about love between my brothers and my sisters
All over babble-land--------------------------------------------------
"If I Had a Hammer" is a song written by Pete Seeger and Lee Hays (and Quintal). It was written in 1949 in support of the progressive movement, and was first recorded by The Weavers, a folk music quartet comprised of Seeger, Hays, Ronnie Gilbert and Fred Hellerman.
The song was not particularly successful when it was first released, likely due in part to the political climate of the time. It fared notably better when it was recorded by Peter, Paul, and Mary more than a decade later. Their cover of the song, released in August of 1962, became a Top 10 hit. The song has since been recorded by dozens of major artists, including a version by Trini Lopez on his 1963 album Trini Lopez at PJ's, as well as one by Leonard Nimoy, which appeared on his 1968 release The Way I Feel. A more recent example is the reggae-style cover released by BBC personality Handy Andy, which was not particularly well received.
It was a Civil Rights anthem of the American Civil Rights movement and covered by dozens of major artists. It also was a common selection for "folk masses" in Catholic Churches.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_had_a_hammer
__________________________________________________
Stanford Prison ExperimentThe Stanford prison experiment was a psychological study of the human response to captivity, in particular to the real world circumstances of prison life and the effects of imposed social roles on behavior. It was conducted in 1971 by a team of researchers led by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. Undergraduate volunteers played the roles of guards and prisoners living in a mock prison that was constructed in the basement of the Stanford psychology building.
Prisoners and guards rapidly adapted to their assigned roles, stepping beyond the boundaries of what had been predicted and leading to genuinely dangerous and psychologically damaging situations. One-third of guards were judged to have exhibited "genuine" sadistic tendencies, while many prisoners were emotionally traumatized and two had to be removed from the experiment early.
Despite the now highly unsanitary and out of control conditions evident, only one of 50 observers, graduate interviewer Christina Maslach, objected to the experiment. Maslach was a former student of Zimbardo's, who was a 'young professor' at UC Berkeley. They were also in a romantic relationship. Maslach told Zimbardo that she thought he was a kind man, but didn't know if she could love someone who would do what he was doing. This prompted Zimbardo to reflect on his role, and resulted in his ending the experiment earlier than planned.[1]Ethical concerns surrounding the famous experiment often draw comparisons to the Milgram experiment, which was conducted in 1963 at Yale University by Stanley Milgram, Zimbardo's former high school friend.
Results:
The experiment very quickly got out of hand. Prisoners suffered—and accepted—sadistic and humiliating treatment at the hands of the guards, and by the end many showed severe emotional disturbance.
After a relatively uneventful first day, a riot broke out on day two. Guards volunteered extra hours and worked together to break up the revolt, attacking the prisoners with fire extinguishers without supervision from the research staff. After this point, the guards tried to divide the prisoners and pit them against each other by setting up a "good" cell block and a "bad" cell block. This was supposed to make the prisoners think that there were "informers" amidst their ranks. The efforts were largely effective, and there were no further large-scale rebellions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment
__________________________________________________
Milgram ExperimentThe Milgram experiment was a seminal series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram, which measured the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience. Milgram first described his research in 1963 in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,[1] and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.[2]
The experiments began in July 1961, three months after the start of the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised the experiments to answer this question: "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?"[3]
Milgram summed things up in his 1974 article, "The Perils of Obedience", writing:
The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects' [participants'] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects' [participants'] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.
Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
__________________________________________________
Interesting studies?Q
poster:Quintal
thread:752395
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070304/msgs/752395.html