Answer:
Nietzsche’s philosophical thoughts on morality argue that a moral code is not in our nature, while
Zimbardo’s argument is that we shouldn’t expect our decisions to be
influenced by morality alone. Nietzsche’s thoughts on morality are
grounded in opposition to Christianity. He begins his argument by
quoting from the Bible, “If thy eye offend thee, pluck it out,” before
labeling the Christian idea as “stupidity” (Paragraph 1). Nietzsche argues
that sensuality is in opposition to Christianity and that the church
“always wanted the destruction of its enemies; we, we immoralists and
Antichristians” (Paragraph 5), adding that “Life has come to an end
where the ‘kingdom of God’ begins” (Paragraph 8). In contrast, Zimbardo
bases his argument on science and proposes that the electric shock
experiment by psychologist Stanley Milgram “provides several lessons
about how situations can foster evil” (Paragraph 5). He also uses
conclusions from a 1974 experiment by Harvard anthropologist John
Watson, as well as his own simulated jail experiment, the 1971 Stanford
Prison Experiment, to help support his argument.
Command, and for mandate manger I think I’m sorry if I am wrong.
It's a charter lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
