I do not know if you have realized, but every time some cutting-edge releases a new idea, just offering resistance. It's like we have an unconscious desire to avoid change. In some cases, we condemn the discoverer of the new paradigm to ostracism. Sometimes, actually ended up with a person's life.

Read this if told by my friend DeRose about the creator of the German physician catheterization:

Werner Forssman, was born in Berlin on August 20, 1904. He graduated in medicine in 1928. He developed a theory that no one would accept: that would be possible to introduce a probe intravenously and bring it to the inside of the heart without killing the patient. Obviously could not use corpses, since they were already dead. Tried the authorization of his superiors at the hospital to carry out experiments on a patient. Of course that was not authorized. So can not use human subjects, used his own body.

He cut a vein in the arm and introduced a catheter (a catheter is the correct pronunciation and not catheter) and was pushing him until he reached the national heart. To prove that he had achieved and that this procedure did not kill the patient, went to the x-ray room and, over the protests of his colleagues, took a picture. It was undeniable! Nobody could question his discovery that would save many lives worldwide. His reward? It was so punished, criticized and attacked what he had to abandon cardiology!

For over two decades was not invited to anything and if he dared to attend a congress had to suffer the embarrassment of being appointed by his peers as an undesirable. After 25 years of humiliation and exclusion, finally, recognition. In 1956, he received the Nobel Prize in Medicine.

Luckily, he was recognized with the award. But imagine how much strength of will and determination he must have had to endure 25 years of exclusion? Did we would have the courage to maintain the belief in such a case?

Think of this as a vaccine. If you are an innovator, a creator, a person who establishes new paradigms, you are absolutely sure that it will face much resistance. To face this fact, develop courage.

This experiment is the most intriguing of all of which involve the study of human behavior. In 1971, Philip Zimbardo , former president of the American Psychological Association and today a professor at Stanford University , decided to test at least curious to transform the Department of Psychology in a simulated prison. The aim was to assess how people react when they were considered normal subjected to a radical change in the normal roles of their lives.

"Rock'n Roll": Zimbardo (E) could not imagine what would happen.

Volunteers showed up after answering a newspaper advertisement. A series of evaluations were made in order to enable choice of persons who were in good health and which are stable mentally. All were college students, males, and were divided arbitrarily into 12 guards and 12 prisoners. Zimbardo decided that would be part and also was elected Superintendent of Jail. The experiment lasted two weeks.

To make a real situation, the "prisoners" were arrested by the "guards" on cars with siren. They had their fingerprints taken, blindfolded and placed in a cell. They took off their clothes, were sanitized with vermifuge, had their hair cut, uniform and won a number and had a chain holding his feet. The guards wore uniforms and batons. All ready for the start of the experiment.

It took two days for the prisoners start a rebellion against his imprisonment. The beds were placed cons doors and guards insulted. These, then, thought it was a good time to use fire extinguishers against the rebels. If not enough, the prisoners left naked and take their beds, so that forced them to sleep on the floor.

From there, hell prevailed. The offense did not stop more. The bathroom use was restricted by guards who forced prisoners to clean them with his own hands. Detainees were forced to do humiliating exercises. Even Zimbardo, who conducted the experiment, became overwhelmed by the role of Superintendent, becoming a rigid institutional figure. For him, the biggest concern it the security of the prison and welfare of participants was relegated to the background.

With only six days, the experiment was interrupted by Zimbardo, with several guards did not agree with the order. The prisoners were psychologically exhausted. It was better stop now before something worse happened.

"And what does all this have to do with me?"

You know those cases that we see on television, guards ill-treating torture innocent or evil? Yeah, it's very likely that you also act the same way as the inquisitors.

Psychologists who have studied more on this subject showed that it keeps you from physically torturarmos people around us is the fear of repercussion. The Stanford Prison experiment showed that it is only to give an absolute power over someone that the person begins to take it as possession and treat it as an object.

This sense of ownership creates attachment and probably caused the man did so many wars, even in the name of religion. Perhaps therein lies one of the reasons we treat our planet with such disregard, subjugating other species and polluting it incessantly. It seems they really are born with some screws and unless we have a long journey to reach a more advanced stage.

Meanwhile, pay attention to yourself, because the next case of gratuitous violence can be played by you.

Watch the video below, produced by Discovery Channel .

[Vodpod id = ExternalVideo.823010 & w = 425 & h = 350 & fv =]

Sources:

Zimbardo, PG (1972). The Stanford Prison Experiment to Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment. Philip G. Zimbardo, Inc.

http://www.mindpowernews.com/5Psychological.htm .

http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/09/our-dark-hearts-stanford-prison.php .

We all know that human beings follow trends. We copy the way people dress, walk, speak and behave. This is very pronounced in adolescence, when the need to be accepted is more intense. But to what extent this tendency to be equal affect us? Do you think human beings are capable of giving a wrong answer, even though the correct one, just to keep the other?

In the 50s of last century, Solomon Asch conducted a series of experiments that prove the human tendency to follow the opinion of others.

The experiment

He did the following: several people were placed in a room with the goal of making a vision test. Variations in the figure below were shown to the group, and after each one, ask yourself which of the lines (A, B or C) was equal to the left. The group was composed of nine people, eight of which were actors, ie after a few rounds giving the correct answer, they began to give the same incorrect answer. They were part of the game without the other person know. Half the time that the spoke and the other line was less than half the line was greater than that presented. The participant was always the sixth guinea pig to respond.

Lines Asch.

Oberservando the figure above, obviously realizes that the correct answer is C. You just answer wrong if under the influence of some hallucinogenic. Note that was not being asked to observe a complex drawing or situation to be interpreted.

The discovery

The results surprised even Solomon Asch:

• 50% of people gave the same answer, following the group, even though he was wrong.
• only 25% of people refused to give the wrong answers.
• in total, the compliance rate was 33%.

Asch people interviewed after the experiment. The reported feelings are very similar to those who already have you felt:

• all felt anxiety, fear of disapproval by others.
• most said they knew the correct line, but felt that the group was correct.
• some said they followed the group for not destoarem, even though the group was wrong.
• a few said it was seeing the line of the same size appointed by the group.

Being conformist or not: that is the question

This Shakespearean dilemma accompanies us every day. There are times to act as the group is a blessing in others a trap. Much of social life depends on this natural act, otherwise our lives would be impractical. Compliance is inherent to human beings and, like you should be aware of all their abilities and gifts, must be more aware of this too.

It's up to you to decide how to act. But, that is adequate, it is necessary to self-knowledge, self-study and self-observation. You might be thinking that is a non-conformist, to find other non-conformists and act the same way they do.

And for you who leads teams, it is important to know that their followers may be following what you say just to conform. It is important that you give voice to them. Maybe some of them do not have the answer that your company needs to make the turn?

Below is a contemporary example of the Asch experiment.

[Vodpod id = ExternalVideo.819135 & w = 425 & h = 350 & fv =]

Choose a job you like, and you will not have to work even one day in your life. Confucius

You do not think it's funny to celebrate Labor Day with ... a holiday? If the breadwinner was pleasing to most people, there would be no need to stay away from him this day. The gap reflects anxiety over the desire to escape a relationship that resembles that which was abolished (at least formally) 120 years ago.

As the Italian sociologist Domenico De Masi , a work truly enjoyable is that you could not tell where the froteira study, leisure and the work itself.

For you to ponder, here's a video antiguinho (so the image quality is not so good) with Waldez Ludwig . Will you respect the plantation-overseer-slave no more?

Leadership: Play Now | Play in Popup | Direct Link