Is the production and advancement in weapons of mass destruction morally right? When I say advancement, I mean, for an bio-engineer, is it morally right for him to continue his research into, say...

Is the production and advancement in weapons of mass destruction morally right?

When I say advancement, I mean, for an bio-engineer, is it morally right for him to continue his research into, say bio-weapons, that could potentially lead to civilian deaths?

 

The broder question being, are weapons of mass destruction morally right? or morally wrong?, wether they are going to be used or not, simply the production of them is an issue.

 

I'm looking for both sides of dilema, feel free to post your 'educated' opinion, and if you have interesting refferences, please leave a link!

Expert Answers
anthonda49 eNotes educator| Certified Educator

No, it is not. However, the scientists are frequently not given the big picture about how their advancements will be used. Just the title "weapon of mass destruction" makes them morally wrong. Defending yourself against attack by an enemy you can see with weapons of a similar nature is what should be. Unfortunately, deterrence has become the norm. If my weapons are bigger than yours, then you won't attack me is the line of thinking. That reasoning lead to the Cold War and the proliferation of nuclear weapons that could destroy life on earth many times over. I doubt the scientists who helped develop nuclear weapons were aware of how much bigger they would become. What was meant to bring about the end of a long and bloody war may bring about the end of mankind. Every terrorist in the world drools over getting their hands on nuclear and biological weapons. There are too many extremists and too many greedy weapons profiteers out there!

brettd eNotes educator| Certified Educator

I agree with the first post.  It isn't, under any circumstances moral, ethical or right to engineer the destruction of the human race and potentially every other species on Earth.  We can come up with historical contextual justifications for the nuclear bomb, but that doesn't make it a moral decision. It was wrong.  Humankind has suffered because of it.  Is still suffering.

litteacher8 eNotes educator| Certified Educator
Just because you can do something does not mean you should. Scientists have a tendency to want to test their theories, to see if their ideas can come to life. Sometimes they will just work for whoever pays them. They might truly believe in their cause, and even beleive that it's the only choice.
lrwilliams eNotes educator| Certified Educator

I would agree with the first two posters in saying that it is morally wrong to produce weapons of mass destruction. Even if you do not plan on them being used, in today's world of terrorism any type of weapon is fair game for the terrorists to gain access to and use.