Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think many, if not most, scientists feel that science shoudl be in the service of knowledge. (I have had the discussion about nuclear weapons many times with DH, a PhD physicist.) Oppenheimer, et al acted like it was one big physics project, yet he and others came out and said we should never use it. I think that is arrogant.
Should scientists be allowed to pursue ideas/research subjects that, within the scope of the foreseeable future, have no apparent benefit except knowledge itself?
True story.
In Australia, scientists were using mice to explore gene therapy. The gene therapy involved injecting female mice with genes to turn off their reproductive systems.
While that's scary enough in itself, they accidentally caused a smallpox virus that affects only mice to mutate into a form that affects humans and one of the mice escaped from the laboratory. Fortunately, after a massive mice-hunt, they found it (dead) before it could affect other mice.
I think many, if not most, scientists feel that science shoudl be in the service of knowledge. (I have had the discussion about nuclear weapons many times with DH, a PhD physicist.) Oppenheimer, et al acted like it was one big physics project, yet he and others came out and said we should never use it. I think that is arrogant.
But is that to be blamed on science/scientists or those who aprropriate the discoveries of science and turn it into harmful technology?
Yes, because time and time again humanity succeeded in turning something harmless into a deadly technology.
Scientists cannot wash their hands in innocence, because they should be accountable. Just like any parent is accountable for his (underage) child's death if he gives it a loaded gun to play with.
Originally Posted by coldwynnYes, because time and time again humanity succeeded in turning something harmless into a deadly technology.
Scientists cannot wash their hands in innocence, because they should be accountable. Just like any parent is accountable for his (underage) child's death if he gives it a loaded gun to play with.
The bad among us will ALWAYS find a way to turn any discovery (that has even the slightest possibility of being used for evil) into something evil.
So, I guess almost every discovery is evil and every scientist is evil as well.
Guns kill people so the person who invented gunpower was evil
Fire burns people so the the ancient "cave man" who discovered how to harness it was evil
Knives kill people so the primitive pre-human who first picked up a sharp shard and used it to defend himself from a predator was evil.
But is that to be blamed on science/scientists or those who aprropriate the discoveries of science and turn it into harmful technology?
I mean, when we discovered iron, yes we made swords, but we also made plows.
Is it a good idea to stop discovery because there is an equal chance of it producing bas as well as good?
We learned this with the bomb.
If we didn't discover it they would have....
And in RR words "do you really think they would have used it to end the war or to take the rest of the world over"
Evil searches science as quickly and sometimes quicker than good. Who's good and evil can be left up to interpretation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just like any parent is accountable for his (underage) child's death if he gives it a loaded gun to play with.
