This reminds of the experiments conducted in the 20th century by that "Dr." Watson and the young and impressionable "Albert B".
They put stuffed animals, masks, pet rats and other things in front of the infant boy. When he touched one of the items, they would strike a steel rod with a hammer behind his head until the boy was petrified to even see the items near him.
What does science gain when it conducts experiments only to conclude that which already should have been known?
We all know that when we touch a candle flame or a sharp point, it causes pain because we have all experienced that sort of pain first hand. Couldn't we have deduced that striking a steel rod would cause pain to the ear drums of a young child, without actually conducting the experiments?
This is the curious nature of the scientist- to explore that which shouldn't and needn't be explored.
Did science gain anything from these new experiments with the hand puppets and boxes?
The result likely has nothing to do with the act of "helping" to open the box. The "good" puppet simply acted in a manner that was acceptable if not pleasing to the babies. The "bad" puppet likely made threatening sounds ultimately finishing with a sudden and violent slam of the box which caused pain or discomfort to the babies ear drums.
If anything the experiments prove that science has no need for morals.
God help any if you fatherless bastards that damages even one ossicle on any of these babies' heads in the name of your scientific endeavors.
