Latest post in my blog on popular science:
Science and hate for religion: a personal anecdote
https://populscience.blogspot.com/2022/08/science-and-hate-for-religion-personal.html
Regards,
Manuel, I certainly agree with your basic premise about not holding science responsible for bad things that are done using the result’s of science. But your statement about Hiroshima and Nagasaki assumes that dropping the atomic bombs was an evil thing, which the American participants did not agree with, and with which I don’t either. Was it more evil than any killing of civilians in any war? Is this not, unfortunately, the only way a war can sometimes be won?
Dimitry
“Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way. Love is not irritable, and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged. It is never glad about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance. Love will last forever.” (1 Corinthians 13: 4-8)
No, it wasn’t more evil than any killing of civilians in any war, except for the numbers of civilians killed. As to your other question, perhaps you are right.
Regards,
If memory serves, the casualty count for Hiroshima and Nagasaki came to about 80,000. That is a very large number. However, the projected casualty count for a conventional invasion of Japan was about 1,000,000. That would mean a projected number of lives saved would be about 920,000. The decision to use the bombs was not a happy one, but it was substantially better than the alternative.