The inherent tensions of science and military complexes.

As children, we are taught the history of the world wars and the tension between the allies and the “enemies.” And, like most children, there ensues a sense of deep conflict over the pride of victory but the empathy for those who died. It seems that the impetus of knowledge has not altered these fundamental tensions, but instead enhanced the grounds by which the tensions are felt.

Dominque Pestre states that during World War I there was no clear policy for the integration of the sciences into the military complex. I would like to think that this should not come as a surprise considering that at the very same time in history, governance over everyday hazards such as pharmaceuticals were still not standard and policy was not developed to generate safe regulations that prohibited the sale of things like mercury or ethylene-glycol from being included in drug therapy. It would seem odd if the United States government had enough involvement to implement policies to continue or govern the relations between military and science. A method of little policy concerning warfare tactics may be quite handy in times of warfare as it would seem a little contradictory to make policies surrounding the use of mustard gas during times of war when that gas may the best way to end the war. The same may also be said of the use of atomic weapons. While society may be quick to cover their eyes to evil that is created, there is little doubt of the world being a much different place without those very evils. This idea expresses the existence of internal tension surrounding the notion of ethics in military science advancements. Do we really want governance over technologies that can end the suffering of war? Pestre also states “it was the physicists who pushed the project forward” in reference to the creation of the atomic bomb. This was only after they contemplated the ethics and chose to advance the military initiative with open eyes. It wasn’t until after the moment of creation that regret became more powerful than the need to compete and overcome the “enemy.” I don’t find this situation very unique, as the creator of mustard gas also advanced his discovery with full knowledge of the capacity to do harm. It is worth considering that the regret may be from the personal involvement in the creation and not in the actual creation of the military device. All of the evils existed in part because there was no policy on the role of science in the military and yet had there been policy that inhibited those evils than maybe the world would be a much different place, for the better or the worse.