A scientist that develops a biological weapon that could kill thousands does deserve to be forgiven under certain circumstances. The weapon could prevent more deaths than it causes or just be used to scare enemies to prevent war. For example, the Cold War was prevented by the large amount of nuclear weapons that both sides had. Both sides were afraid of the destruction the weapons would cause, so they never used them. Those weapons prevented a real war; therefore the scientist that developed them saved many lives and should be forgiven.
I absolutely agree with your decision. Even though the weapon has the capability to kill does not mean it will be used to kill. The weapon could just be a standoff weapon to ward off wars. This would prevent death instead of causing. So he should be forgiven.
ReplyDeleteI love your point that even though the weapon could KILL thousands, it could also be used to SAVE thousands. Do you think that it depends on whose hands the weapon are in? Do you think that the same outcome would be possible in the war we are involved in today?
ReplyDeleteWhat an interesting perspective. Your example of the Cold War is interesting. But, as Pickett says, does it matter whose hands the weapons are in? Take, for example, the current standoff with Iran. Most of the world seems to agree nuclear power in their hands would be destructive. Can't this destruction be traced back to the scientists who invented this technology in the first place? I'm not saying the scientists should be held responsible, but it does seem that inventions--even when they're intended for good--can spiral out of control and end up in the wrong hands.
ReplyDelete