To what extent are scientists responsible for their discoveries?

Answer 1

To the extent of reporting the findings and the method accurately...now, if the application of those findings are applied in the wrong way (destoying others etc) that willl be the sole responsibility, will be of those that misuse or abuse the findings, not the scientis itself...
As aralel example, the synthesis and clinical use of methyl phenidate (Ritalin, Concerta etc), was made with specific therapeutic uses (to alleviate people from something)..and after you find that many people use those to get high, not to alleviate nor cure disease, but for that euphemistic wor of recreational purposes, which is just geting high for kicks,, or injecting intravebously something that has been designed to be taken only by mouth (some people may grind those substances down to tallc powder to make intravenous solutions), well, in that case, ans in the others, the responsible for the misuse, is only the user....no one else...

Answer 2

This looks like an essay on Fritz Haber, whose process prolonged the First World War by several years, but also feeds a good proportion of the world's population.

Answer 3

as a rule, no. Scientists seek for to comprehend the organic international (elementary technology) or remedy a topic (utilized technology). The purpose in the back of their activities is purely approximately in no way criminal, nevertheless their discoveries might have criminal means while misinterpreted or misused. in the examples you pronounced, discoveries bearing directly to cloning and stem cells have been immensely valuable contributions to biology, even nevertheless they have the means to offend or entice blame. while used properly, such know-how is helpful, no longer risky. study right now bearing directly to weapons progression is extra iffy; Oppenheimer is remembered as a super scientist, yet his artwork led to tens of millions of deaths and injuries. His artwork replaced into justified through WWII and so he replaced into no longer culpable for outcomes of the atomic bomb. yet in a fashion, he and his team are to "blame", perhaps, for the state of nuclear proliferation that we've in the present day. purpose is an significant ingredient in no count if or no longer scientists might desire to be blamed for doubtlessly risky discoveries. in almost all of situations, scientists have not got malicious purpose.