Yi-Hsuan Rei

p.d.3
1/3/2015

Reflecting on the Impacts of Science

Human-beings are born to be curious. People want to understand the world around us.
They want to un-mask the mysteries of the universe. However, there can be some serious
consequences and impacts to the world as the new things being discovered. And they can be
against the morality and the values of the society. Who should be responsible for the impacts of
scientists works when the works create problems from the way people using them? Should be
the scientists themselves, or the people who made the decision to use the new inventions in a
way that against basic rights? As we know morality is different among individuals, groups, and
even societies. And the morality issues behind the research conducted by scientists have been
discussed and debated over and over again, yet there is still no absolute answer due the
difference among people. In this paper, the responsibility of scientists and the morality issues of
sciences research will be discussed, and my opinion regarding the issues will be presented.
According to Albert Einstein, from his letter to President Roosevelt, he believes that a
scientists decision about search for dependent truth on practical object will not be based on a
logical basis, but on their conviction, their thinking, therefore, on a moral basis. (Whitfield) In
other word, the only reference for making decision on this kind of thing is the morality of the
scientists. However, because there is no standard morality, as we cannot control peoples mind
and thinking, problems can be created as the scientists make their decisions.
Because the decisions are based on ones own judgment, it is possible for someone who
has a very extreme individualism and faith to make the decision. But the extreme is not a good or
reliable guide for a search for objective truth. In fact, anything that can be considered as
extreme is not a good thing; no matter it is in the field of science, the field of art, or the field of
politics. An extreme, or even blind, faith in ones belief limits the sights of people. They cannot
accept others opinion if it is different from their own. In the processes of research, gathering
different points of view and advice from other is very important. The brainstorming process is
necessary for people to come up with a new idea. But with this overly faith on ones own
judgment, the truth cannot be considered as objective anymore. Yet sometime it is important
to have faith on ones own judgment, as many times what the society believes is not the truth,
scientists need the faith that help them undergo all the pressure they received, in some occasions,
they must promote individualism rather than social values and 'progress'.(Goldsmith) But if it
turns into a reasonless, blindly trust then it is not a good thing.
The intensions for researching and developing new technology can be good and in a
justice way, however, it can all gone wrong and fall into the hands of politicians who use it in the
wrong way that bring terrible consequences. What kinds of research fall under the category of
morally blind exponents of political power, as Einstein noted? One kind is biotechnology. It
is a technology involving the use of living things, such as their organism, to produce product that
can benefit the society. So, how can it be morally blind and becomes part of politics? Just like the
search for nuclear power, it is possible to develop biological weapons from this technology
which can bring mass destruction to all human-kinds if people use it them in wars, just like the
atomic bombs used in World War II that took away countless lives and broke countless families.
Yet we know that the politicians always said without the two bombs, WWII would not stop, but
is that really the truth? Think back of the intension for creating a group of scientists who research

Yi-Hsuan Rei
p.d.3
1/3/2015

on nuclear power, is it to create nuclear bomb before the Nazi makes it since they might use it in
a way that against human-kinds? Isnt the drop of atomic bombs in Japan just a way for
politicians to show their power to the world through the war? Now, there are growing threat
about biological weapons as the probability of terrorists own biological weapons is
growing(Williams), should we respond to it like what we did with the atomic bombs? If so, isnt
it possible the same thing happened in WWII could happen again?
The other kind of search that we should stay away from is the search on human cloning.
Human cloning has been discussed many times throughout the history ever since the technique of
cloning living thing had been developed. However, we really should stay away from this kind of
research. The reason is, human cloning does not fit in the value of society. People concern that
the lack of safety of the technology for human applications and the likely deleterious impacts of
cloning on the family and human dignity. (Chapman) It is very hard to create appropriate law
regarding them if they are made. Yet in one point of view, they can be recognized as a recreation
of oneself, but on the other hand, they can also be recognized as completely new and
independent individuals. What they will experience in their life will not be the same as the
original, but the DNA of them will be the same as the original, which can be use in surgery and
there will be almost no rejection and increase the chance of the original alive. But if the human
cloning has their own thinking, wouldnt that kind of action becomes a seed for possible terrible
consequence? Then, how should we view them as? Also, it is possible one day the politicians
decide to use human cloning to create military forces, yet it might sound like a crazy idea right
now, but remember that atomic bomb was once only a crazy idea as well. If this kind of things
happens, how should we react to it? In one sense they still should be considered as human
beings, and that means they should have their basic rights. But if the politicians ever come to
the conclusion to send them onto the battle field as they are made, they become more like war
machine instead of humans. If that happens, does the scientists have any says on the decision
making process? Ideally, they should. However the reality is rarely met the ideal we have in
mind, and according to that sense, it is very hard for scientists to change politicians mind, since
what they have considered in mind is different. The best way to solve the conflict is by not do
any research regarding human cloning. It is like a way where the problem itself is not solved, but
not until the day we can come to perfect solution for it, it should stay as what it is now. That so,
we should stay away from it.
Lastly, is there any responsibility to the scientists as the new inventions bring tragedy to
the whole society? There are some, definitely. As the new invention being made, the scientists
should warn the world about how danger they could be if do not use properly. However, the one
who actually use the invention in a way that caused tragic result should take most blame as long
as the intension of the research is not something injustice. Also, keep in mind that most of the
conveniences in our life are the results of scientists work. For example, even though the
development of nuclear weapon brings unpleasant result and consequences to the world, the
benefits we got from nuclear power are still important and should not be ignored. The technology
of creating electricity from nuclear power is one of the major benefits for people around the
world. Yet there are still risks for using the nuclear power in this way, but unlike what happened
during WWII, a tragedy resulted from humans decision, this kind of tragedy are more often the
result of not normal changes in nature.

Yi-Hsuan Rei
p.d.3
1/3/2015

It is true that science can bring unpleasant tragedy and effects to our world, but the
scientists who create the inventions should not be blames. The politicians who made the
decisions about using the inventions in a way that creates problems at last should be blamed.
Science can help us understand the unknown universe we live in; it can help us with many things
in life, but it can be dangerous as well. We should never forget the tragic impacts from science;
we should remember them as a reminder to ourselves for not repeating the mistake in the future.
As more and more new inventions and breakthroughs have been made, there will be more and
more challenges on the morality of the world, the society, and the individuals. How should we
respond to them is the question that everyone, as part of the world, should consider.

Yi-Hsuan Rei
p.d.3
1/3/2015

Work Cited
Chapman, Audrey R. "Genetic Engineering and Theology: Exploring the Interconnections." Theology
Today. April 2002 Vol. 59 No. 1: 71-89. SIRS Renaissance. Web. 04 Jan. 2015.
Goldsmith, Edward, and Lewis Wolpert. "Is Science Neutral?." Ecologist. May 2000: 20-23. SIRS Issues
Researcher. Web. 04 Jan. 2015.
Whitfield, Donald, and James L. Hicks.The Scientists Responsibility.Whats the Matter?:Readings in
Physic.Chicago.IL:Great Foundation, 2007.N.pag.Print.
Williams, Mark. "The Knowledge." Technology Review Vol. 109, No. 1. March/April 2006: 44-53. SIRS
Issues Researcher. Web. 04 Jan. 2015.