bio weapon

Debate and discussion of any biological questions not pertaining to a particular topic.

Moderators: honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

kiekyon
Coral
Coral
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:10 am
Location: Malaysia

bio weapon

Post by kiekyon » Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:42 am

get this question from a fellow biology student. just like to hear all your views on this

how do scientists, who are educated to help humanity, justify the use of their privileged knowledge for the explicit goal of killing civilians en masse?

User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)
Contact:

Post by alextemplet » Sun Jul 16, 2006 6:58 pm

The biggest reason for developing WMDs is as a deterent; that is, no one will attack us if we have the biggest and baddest weapons. It is for this reason alone that the Cold War did not escalate into World War III, because the US and Soviets were too afraid of each other's nukes. WMDs are actually a worthwhile investment that can lead to the saving of many lives who would otherwise be killed in a war that could've been prevented.
Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

~Alex
#2 Total Post Count

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:43 pm

Money? Fanatism? Poor personal ethics? And as far as I know, not that I do not regret it, but ethics are not a mandatory part of scientific studies.

Scientist are human, and just as likely to be good... or not.
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

User avatar
mith
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Post by mith » Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:40 pm

Brainwashing and propaganda, see eugenics...
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
~Niebuhr

User avatar
mkwaje
Coral
Coral
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Philippines

Post by mkwaje » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:14 am

Every technology always has two sides. It is always the man behind the gun that killed the man. But will we stop making cars because there are a lot of car accidents, or stop building planes because of air crashes? Nobody can justify the production of bio weapons; harming another person has always been a part of man's faulty character with reasons relatively logical from someone else's standpoint. Just like the production of guns, grenades, bombs, missiles, bio weapon is simply a tool. Almost everybody can be trained to produce one even if you're not a scientist, so let's not simply dump the blame on them whenever we hear bio weapons.

kiekyon
Coral
Coral
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:10 am
Location: Malaysia

Post by kiekyon » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:09 pm

just a little reminder..

at present, the development and testing of biological weapons is banned by international law and all major state-funded programmes have been terminated; therefore, such activity is associated only with criminals or terrorists

kiekyon
Coral
Coral
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:10 am
Location: Malaysia

Post by kiekyon » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:46 pm

Canalon wrote:Money? Fanatism? Poor personal ethics? And as far as I know, not that I do not regret it, but ethics are not a mandatory part of scientific studies.

Scientist are human, and just as likely to be good... or not.


can you explain what you meant by "good" and "bad" scientist?

kiekyon
Coral
Coral
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:10 am
Location: Malaysia

Post by kiekyon » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:49 pm

mkwaje wrote:Every technology always has two sides. It is always the man behind the gun that killed the man. But will we stop making cars because there are a lot of car accidents, or stop building planes because of air crashes? Nobody can justify the production of bio weapons; harming another person has always been a part of man's faulty character with reasons relatively logical from someone else's standpoint. Just like the production of guns, grenades, bombs, missiles, bio weapon is simply a tool.


agreed..

but dont you think that in this case, the potential risks are simply too great?

kiekyon
Coral
Coral
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:10 am
Location: Malaysia

Post by kiekyon » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:52 pm

alextemplet wrote:The biggest reason for developing WMDs is as a deterent; that is, no one will attack us if we have the biggest and baddest weapons.


dont u think u really should know better now??

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:33 pm

kiekyon wrote:
Canalon wrote:Money? Fanatism? Poor personal ethics? And as far as I know, not that I do not regret it, but ethics are not a mandatory part of scientific studies.

Scientist are human, and just as likely to be good... or not.


can you explain what you meant by "good" and "bad" scientist?


In this case I would rather say "evil" than "bad". I thought that it was self-explanatory, but let just say that someone working on developing Bio-weapon probably knows what he is doing, and I call "evil" someone who do not stop doing that immediatly.

And I do not think that you can create a bio-weapon inadvertatntly, just like you can create a chemical for one thing (say as an insecticide or something else) and realise later, that the side effects are quite lethal...
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)
Contact:

Post by alextemplet » Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:36 am

Canalon wrote:And I do not think that you can create a bio-weapon inadvertatntly, just like you can create a chemical for one thing (say as an insecticide or something else) and realise later, that the side effects are quite lethal...


Isn't that how the atomic bomb was invented? Wasn't Einstein trying to find a new energy source, and then the government realised its potential and used it as a war-winning weapon?
Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

~Alex
#2 Total Post Count

User avatar
damien james
Coral
Coral
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:51 am
Location: U.S.

Re: bio weapon

Post by damien james » Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:14 am

kiekyon wrote:get this question from a fellow biology student. just like to hear all your views on this

how do scientists, who are educated to help humanity, justify the use of their privileged knowledge for the explicit goal of killing civilians en masse?


Just because you are scientist does not automatically make moral, just, or peaceful human being.
The hand of God may well be all around us, but it is not, nor can it be, the task of science to dust for fingerprints.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests