Science has a big effect on development of our lives. Good examples of this advance are how we use electricity, drive cars, and cure illnesses. However, scientist’s discoveries are not always be profitable or have positive consequences to human being because it would emerge give rise to negative results later on. Some people may argue that this scientist is responsible for the negative result. However, I have a different idea. When it comes to the statement that the result comes from users who use the discoveries not scientists, I strongly agree with it. I totally think that scientist is not responsible for negative impact of their discoveries for 2 reasons;
First of all, negative impacts of their discoveries are responsible to the people who utilize the discoveries later rather than scientist. Scientists' fundamental reason to exist is to explore their subject or to develop something which make makes humans' lives better. It means that scientists intend their discoveries to be used in a right direction, not headed negative direction. However, their discoveries are not always used what as they are intended because the people who harness the discoveries use them for along with their purpose not scientists’ purpose. For example, Nobel, the most famous chemist, invented dynamite to develop mine. However, regardless of his intention, users utilized them in war to defeat other nation. Like this, the positive invention is sometimes used used for negative purpose, even though scientists didn’t want that. Therefore, scientists are not responsible for the negative impact of their discoveries since it is up to how and who the achievement would be used. since the usage is up to the people who utilize them.
Second, liability for negative result prevents scientists from exploring. compresses various scope of science exploring. Science could can be developed and improved wider and deeper in a free atmosphere to study. Scientist should tend to be passive with the pressure of negative consequence. There is a convincing example supporting this idea. A dominant newspaper reported a related article. According to the article, there is a doctor who wants to try his own medicine discovery to a patient that is dying with a terminal disease. The doctor may have the conviction that his study would cure the ailment, but if the public asked the responsibility of negative effects to the doctor, he cannot even try the new discovery because of the serious concerns about the responsibility of a negative reaction after he tried his new discovery to patients. So the disease would be existed permanently as an impossible illness impossible to cure. This article proves that responsibility of negative impact makes scientist does not create something more. This article provest that scientists taking resposibility for negative impacts only hinders possible discoveries.
In conclusion, people, other than the scientist, who take advantage of scientist’s discoveries may bring about negative consequence not scientist. Also, responsibility of negative impact makes scientist exploring stay in a limited scope of sciences. Therefore, scientists are is not responsible for negative outcomes of their discoveries. |