Would the world have been a better place if gunpowder had never been invented?

Question

The earliest record of gunpowder is in a Chinese book from around 850 AD. Gunpowder was first used in warfare in 904, as flaming projectiles called "flying fires." Soon after that its use was expanded to explosive grenades hurled from catapults. Next gunpowder was used as a propellant. The first such use recorded was in 1132 with mortars consisting of bamboo tubes.Mortars with metal tubes first appeared around 1270. Gunpowder spread to the Arabs in the 13th century. The first written reference to gunpowder in Europe was in a book written in 1248.

And the rest, as they say, is history. We all know of the horrors of war and human misery caused throughout the centuries by the use of gunpowder. So would the world have been better off without gunpowder and a better place today?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder

Answer 1

Technology is not inherently good or evil, it is its application.

Gunpowder is excellent for firing projectiles. But it is also excellent for blasting rock and removing obstacles. It is how humans cut tunnels, widened passages, built canals and acquire concrete building materials. Some applications can be harmful, but others can be beneficial.

Nuclear Fission destroyed two cities in Japan and killed thousands. But it also powers many cities. Fission: Good or evil?

I am of the belief that we should always seek new technologies while simultaneously seeking the wisdom to harness them in a productive way.

Answer 2

No, for every horror of war there is a benefit from it. War makes science turn out new products at a rate not paralleled. We have advanced as a people because of what war has forced us to do. With out Gun powder, we would still be living much like they did in the 15th century. That would not be that grand.
b

Answer 3

Wow, you defined a Utopia. there is one concern, despite the fact that, that I could desire to disagree with. The Holocaust became into undesirable, yet we study from history. We study how Hitler got here to potential, how international locations react in a worldwide conflict, why communism could fail. Wait woah! Scratch that, now that i'm thinking approximately it, you're describing communism. Equality for all, no opposition... no social Darwinism. There could be no progression if we reached perfection. every physique could be happy, and there could be no choose for technological awareness. Do you get me? Ah faith. throughout the time of history we've been taught that faith motives violence. right this moment Athiest are standard. they have an inclination to be extra non violent than non secular human beings, with the aid of fact they don't shove ideals down our throats. additionally who even needs a theocracy? we could bypass lower back to burning witches. it is not progression in any respect. Oh and btw, morals can nevertheless study with out faith. I discovered transforming into up that the only rationalization why my relatives became into catholic, alongside with different pals and relatives, became into for the phobia of going to hell. somewhat? that's a undesirable reason to worship! i don't be attentive to, that's merely my opinion. I strongly have self assurance that the worldwide could be a extra valuable place if we've been all bare. extra valuable self esteems, women get much less sexuality, meaning much less rape and undesirable being pregnant. much less AIDS/STD's. and lots lots extra, merely including on your record ;]

Answer 4

I don't think so. We are humans. We are resourceful. Even before gunpowder, humans did a fine job of killing each other, starting wars, mass killings, etc. Go read your history book.

Answer 5

No.Guns don't prevent people from committing violent acts.If a violent person doesn't have a gun they will simply use other means to commit their crime.However I am against the war,violence never seems to solve anything.

Answer 6

Maybe , but we can not go back in time .
We can not ask ourselves , what would the world have been like if we never invented the " wheel ".

Answer 7

Yes, we should have gone straight to plastic explosives they are much more stable to transport.