Should scientists be held morally responsible for the applications of their discoveries?

Question

For example; Are the people who discovered nuclear energy responsible for the nuclear bomb?

Answer 1

It is the role of scientists to discover things. They are not morally responsible for what they discover. Morality does not apply to scientific discoveries. It is that simple.

Those who decided to use the atomic bomb bear the moral responsibility for its use - not the scientists who discovered how to make it.

Answer 2

while your question could be easily answered, maybe an answer of some depth would be appreciated.

You example of nuclear science is a start. The program was developed under a weapons program, but it was meerly the mechanism that was developed. This created an entire new world of medicine, energy, and weapons.

Would the person who created steel, be responsible for the carnage from a sword?

The application of science is where the moral question comes in.

Gene splicing was the mechanism. Disease resistance is an application, so is a biological weapon.

I guess it goes back to the old addage " just because we can, doesnt mean we should"

Answer 3

Scientist are not morally responsible. Discovering a thing shows what was unknown to the human being. Scientists put forth the truth and ways to find it out. Any discovery may be used for the benefit or the harm for the society or the humanity. Morality lies on the individual who is utilizing it or applying it. So it is responsibility of user whether one is utilizing it positively or negatively. Utilization may be both constructive or destructive. The knife can be used both ways either to cut the fruits and vegetables or to cut the throat of a man. We cant not blame morally the man who invented knife for killing the person by cutting throat.

Answer 4

All things can be used negitively...so there would be no scientific discovery if scientists were held responsible for the applications.

i.e. the inventor of plastic...it can be used to save lives as well as destroy them....so even though many lives are saved through medical devices, cars run over people and they die being hit by plastic bumpers, and little kids suffocate in plastic bags all the time...so should that group of people bear all of the burdens of it?!?
and by the way, nuclear energy is still one of the cleanest sources of energy around...so what about all the kids in Russia that aren't asthmatic because of their lower air pollution to generate power?

Answer 5

No. It is the decision to make such an item. Dr. Lise Meitner wrote the equations that explained atomic bombs, and Einstein wrote FDR to create an atomic weapon.

However, it took two billion dollars and four years during the Second World War to actually develop the weapon itself. The moral responsibility goes to the political elites who authorized construction of the devices.

We could have a devastating weapon of simple orbiting rocks. We nudge them into a fall, and then it's just ballistics as we induce meteors. This is an old idea, but the fault would be those who choose to weaponize it.

Answer 6

Of course not.

Misapplication of science is frequently rooted in politics. But do we hold Harry Truman responsible for using "the bomb" on Japan? It was a horrible thing to do, but the alternative, losing up to 4 million men in the invasion of Japan, was an even worse option.

On the other hand, should we hold Bush responsible for putting US science a few steps behind the rest of the world because he refuses to budge on stem cell research?

Answer 7

surely not. human beings like Neils Bohr and Werner von Braun made specific discoveries interior the sphere of technology. the government(s) that earnings on(s) those discoveries may be the only(s) judged.

Answer 8

LOL...NO
That's like holding Chevy responsible for a hit and run accident.