The Nature of Role-playing: Abu Ghraib
by The incident at Abu Ghraib was a horrible ordeal which can be easily compared to the 1971 Zimbardo Prison Study. In comparing them, it is easy to conclude that any person has the capacity to commit such acts when put in certain societal roles.
A military defense attorney in the case of abuse at Abu Ghraib tried to defend the actions of the soldiers by saying they were acting on orders. In support of this, he asked the question, “Do you really think a group of kids from rural Virginia decided to do this on their own? Decided that the best way to embarrass Arabs and make them talk was to have them walk around nude?”(2004). Clearly, from the data provided, the answer to this could easily be yes. While they may have been acting on orders, their expressions in the photos, and the fact that they themselves never reacted against the orders due to their own moral obligations, leaves room for Zimbardo’s findings on the matter. (Hersh, 2004)
Abu Ghraib was a terrible incident that should never have happened. While I found it most disturbing to research the incident, it was rewarding for my own growth and knowledge. Perhaps knowing how easily a person can switch into a role will prevent myself and others from being so easily altered by a task. And in knowing as much, be able to maintain the moral integrity that is instilled within every individual to prevent occurrences like these from happening.
Even though the incident at Abu Ghraib in 2003 was disturbing on many levels, it would not be a far stretch to say that any person could be capable of acting in such ways. This fact should be most distressing to all. The power of a particular role in society can have many effects on a person causing them to become completely different than what they normally are. Zimbardo gives a true summary to both events by stating that, “ we realized how ordinary people could be readily transformed from the good Dr. Jekyll to the evil Mr. Hyde”(1999).
Liked it
