In “Humankind,” the author presents an optimistic view of human nature, arguing that people are fundamentally inclined towards kindness, cooperation, and avoiding conflict, rather than aggression or dominance. A significant part of this argument involves questioning the validity of well-known psychological studies, including the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Philip Zimbardo. This experiment has traditionally been cited as evidence of people’s natural inclination towards abusive behavior in situations of power imbalance. However, “Humankind” suggests that the study’s design and conduct might have been manipulated to produce certain results, challenging its conclusions about human nature.
@Zozo001CoN I learned about it from mainstream “psychology” books and videos from popular creators on YouTube, so knowing that it was actually nonsense was a big surprise to me. I thought maybe if I posted this question, someone would present counterarguments to why the study was useful, but till now, it seems there is a strong consensus that the results were manipulated. It is good to hear that not everyone was fooled by it like I was.