It is debated whether scientists should strive to enhance and bolster people's well-being or pursue groundbreaking advancements in the realm of science, regardless of potential harm. I firmly agree that scientific discoveries should primarily pave the way for the sustainable development of humanity.
Firstly
, scholars themselves are an integral part of society. Linking Words
Thus
, intending to create something that could devastate many people's hopes for a bright future harms not only society but Linking Words
also
the scientists themselves. Linking Words
For example
, during the construction of the atomic bomb in Los Alamos during World War 2, numerous science experts and students were exposed to the detrimental effects of uranium. Linking Words
Although
the usage of Linking Words
this
bomb eventually led to the end of World War 2, more than 100,000 peaceful citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki suffered the same symptoms as the experts did during experiments. Linking Words
Therefore
, prior to inventing something or making a discovery, science experts should thoroughly contemplate the potential repercussions and their impact on individuals' lives.
Linking Words
Secondly
, governments consistently allocate substantial financial resources to scientific advancements. Linking Words
For instance
, during the 1940s, around 2 billion dollars were spent on building a nuclear bomb in the USA. A significant portion of these funds were obtained from taxes paid by hardworking citizens, many of whom were struggling to make ends meet. In my view, it is morally unacceptable to squander money that people Linking Words
earned
through blood, sweat and tears on something that would significantly exacerbate their suffering.
Taking everything into consideration, scientific inventions should unequivocally foster the well-being of all. I strongly recommend that scientists prioritize moral considerations as an essential foundation for any research endeavour.Wrong verb form
earn
ryskulovstreet