Biochemical weapons

Nowadays the matter of biochemical weapons is widely discussed. Some people might argue that with the help of these weapons no more so-called innocent people will be killed. That leads us to the question, who is innocent and who is not? Is not all life precious? Does your genetic information or the city you live in decide whether you are good or bad? Can you still call a man innocent if he has killed hundreds of people? To begin with, it is clear that all of us want scientists to find cures for fatal illnesses.

Thus in my opinion, if scientists create a substance, they should never try it out on humans or even animals, moreover if it means risking their lives. The moral obligations a scientist has is to keep all information for himself until he knows everything about the subject of his research. If he discovers that a substance he has produced could have mortal consequences, he is bound to destroy all of the information about the it and the substance itself too. Science has always been important for the progress of a country.Nevertheless there are limits that should be set. It is essential for society to keep on doing scientific research on the universe and on new cures for complex illnesses. On the other hand we have to prevent more cruel wars than we have ever had before.

Don't use plagiarized sources.
Get Your Custom Essay on "Biochemical weapons..."
For You For Only $13.90/page!

Get custom paper

And that is where there should be limits, scientific progress that is based on killing. Biochemical weapons would be an alternative for former weapons. Thus why do we need weapons at all? If noone had weapons how could there be war?Would not all people have to talk about the problems their country has? They would have to do demonstrations and strikes, or find other ways to change their country’s economic and political state.

The problem is, who sets the limits? Can we trust our government to make a moral decision like this? Can we trust the scientists? Would it be even more fatal if people fixed the limits? In the end I come to the conclusion that the government will make the safest decisions, at least we can hope that.The danger already started hundreds of years ago, when people started searching for causes of and cures for natural sources. If anybody once discovers something, he can never take it back, if he does not use it, someone else will find it and make the worst of it. To sum up, we cannot prevent the danger. Nonetheless we can lessen the danger, we can try to keep the scientists in control, by electing a trustworthy government that will not use science for human diminishment.

Choose your subject


I'm Jessica!

Don't know how to start your paper? Worry no more! Get professional writing assistance from me.

Click here