My View Concerning the Experiment

本文针对Milgram实验结论进行了深入探讨,认为普通人即便只是履行职责,也可能成为可怕破坏过程的一部分,即使他们没有特别的敌意。文章从多个角度分析了批评者Williams可能存在的误解。

Concerning the experiment, I believe the conclusion of Milgram's. William's critiquing, in my opinion, seems containing misjudgment in it. Milgram's statement was "Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process." William must have misunderstood some words in this sentence.

Firstly, the word "ordinary" is misunderstood or omitted. There were three people disobeyed the experimenter. Were they ordinary people or not? In order to make this clear, we must first define it. I think it means "Of no exceptional ability, degree, or quality; average." So, the three people should not be considered ordinary. They each had an exceptional quality that most people do not occupy. Since the three were not ordinary, the critiquing based on this is not reasonable.

Secondly, what does the word "simply" mean? It means "just, only". 'They "just or only" did their jobs'. What's the meaning of sentence? Shall we understand it this way: They just did jobs, did not imply any other substances into their jobs? Then, why should a person to think about the effect of his/her job when he/she is just doing their job? On this point, the three people were not doing a job simply, but actively. So the three people's deeds should not be used to criticize the conclusion. They

are completely two different things.

Thirdly, the word "particular" may be misunderstood. What' the meaning of "particular"? It means "Of, belonging to, or associated with a specific person, group, thing, or category; not general or universal". In short, it means "unusual". I think it means "on purpose" here. Milgram didn't mean that they (the ordinary people) did their work without the "hostility". Milgram meant that they had the "hostility" but not "on purpose". Every subject could see "DENGER" in the experiment. To say they do the work without "hostility" is, obviously false. But how could one say that the subjects work without "particular hostility" is false? On this point, William's critiquing seems not so correct.

Here comes my conclusion: when ordinary people simply doing their jobs, they really can become agents in a terrible destructive process, without any particular hostility on their part. We all participated, participating, or will participate in such kind of process.

**项目名称:** 基于Vue.js与Spring Cloud架构的博客系统设计与开发——微服务分布式应用实践 **项目概述:** 本项目为计算机科学与技术专业本科毕业设计成果,旨在设计并实现一个采用前后端分离架构的现代化博客平台。系统前端基于Vue.js框架构建,提供响应式用户界面;后端采用Spring Cloud微服务架构,通过服务拆分、注册发现、配置中心及网关路由等技术,构建高可用、易扩展的分布式应用体系。项目重点探讨微服务模式下的系统设计、服务治理、数据一致性及部署运维等关键问题,体现了分布式系统在Web应用中的实践价值。 **技术架构:** 1. **前端技术栈:** Vue.js 2.x、Vue Router、Vuex、Element UI、Axios 2. **后端技术栈:** Spring Boot 2.x、Spring Cloud (Eureka/Nacos、Feign/OpenFeign、Ribbon、Hystrix、Zuul/Gateway、Config) 3. **数据存储:** MySQL 8.0(主数据存储)、Redis(缓存与会话管理) 4. **服务通信:** RESTful API、消息队列(可选RabbitMQ/Kafka) 5. **部署与运维:** Docker容器化、Jenkins持续集成、Nginx负载均衡 **核心功能模块:** - 用户管理:注册登录、权限控制、个人中心 - 文章管理:富文本编辑、分类标签、发布审核、评论互动 - 内容展示:首页推荐、分类检索、全文搜索、热门排行 - 系统管理:后台仪表盘、用户与内容监控、日志审计 - 微服务治理:服务健康检测、动态配置更新、熔断降级策略 **设计特点:** 1. **架构解耦:** 前后端完全分离,通过API网关统一接入,支持独立开发与部署。 2. **服务拆分:** 按业务域划分为用户服务、文章服务、评论服务、文件服务等独立微服务。 3. **高可用设计:** 采用服务注册发现机制,配合负载均衡与熔断器,提升系统容错能力。 4. **可扩展性:** 模块化设计支持横向扩展,配置中心实现运行时动态调整。 **项目成果:** 完成了一个具备完整博客功能、具备微服务典型特征的分布式系统原型,通过容器化部署验证了多服务协同运行的可行性,为云原生应用开发提供了实践参考。 资源来源于网络分享,仅用于学习交流使用,请勿用于商业,如有侵权请联系我删除!
评论
成就一亿技术人!
拼手气红包6.0元
还能输入1000个字符
 
红包 添加红包
表情包 插入表情
 条评论被折叠 查看
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值