"During peace time a scientist belongs to the World, but during war time he belongs to his country" – Fritz Haber
Fritz Haber and J. Robert Oppenheimer were born nearly forty years apart. They were separated by an ocean, and lived in two vastly different worlds. Both men were brilliant academics and controversial wartime scientists. However, through the progress of their scientific research, they shared the singular similarity of creating the most destructive and dangerous weapons for global warfare. Haber and Oppenheimer’s moral integrities have been questioned for over fifty years; and today many debate the true effectiveness of chemical warfare and the necessity of dropping a nuclear bomb. The controversial nature of their contributions insures that both men unconventionally defined their morality throughout their lives. Haber and Oppenheimer’s morality was defined through their own perceptions of their rights and responsibilities as ordinary citizens, wartime scientists, and civilian scientists. Haber and Oppenheimer’s morality was grounded in their upbringing, progressed while developing highly destructive weapons, and concluded with the moral and political fallouts endured after each war.
A Moral Compass
Fritz Haber was born in 1868 in Breslau, Prussia . Over his lifetime, Haber developed a complicated moral compass, guided mainly by his childhood exposure to German nationalism and militarism. Haber’s generation was the first to consider itself German after the unification of Germany and the establishment of the Kaiserreich, the second German empire, in 1871. While political consensus faced religious and ethnic barriers, many saw the possibility of the greater success of a united German state. The establishment of a uni...
... middle of paper ...
... of Fritz Haber and J. Robert Oppenheimer through their understanding of their rights and responsibilities, it can be said that the environment in which humans mature, orients how they view and understand the world. When Haber and Oppenheimer were children, their respective home and national backgrounds shaped how they viewed their purpose and prerogative throughout their lives. While Haber was brought up believing in a society of extreme patriotism and militarism, Oppenheimer was raised in an intellectual setting that encouraged discourse. The characteristics of their different circumstances formed both men’s reaction during and after the wars, contrasting Haber’s steadfast belief in the system with Oppenheimer’s questioning of the system. In the end, their rights and responsibilities as civilians, wartime scientists, and civilian scientists shaped their humanity.
A young scientist who was very smart and intelligent was the creator of a bomb that killed millions. The bomb was the most powerful weapon that was ever manufactured. He changed the course of World War II. This man is Robert Oppenheimer, creator of the atomic bomb. The book “Bomb” by Steve Sheinkin, is a book that includes teamwork and how Americans made a deadly bomb that changed the course of the war. The book engages the reader through how spies share secret information with enemies. Because the physicists were specifically told not to share any information, they were not justified in supplying the Soviet Union with the bomb technology.
Hagen W (2012). ‘German History in Modern Times: Four Lives of the Nation’. Published by Cambridge University Press (13 Feb 2012)
Aldridge, Alexandra. The Scientific World View in Dystopia. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Research Press, 1984.
Most writers take sides, either for or against the atom bomb. Instead of taking sides, he challenges his readers to make their own opinions based on their personal meditations. One of the key questions we must ask ourselves is “Are actions intended to benefit the large majority, justified if it negatively impacts a minority?” The greatest atrocity our society could make is to make a mistake and not learn from it. It is important, as we progress as a society, to learn from our mistakes or suffer to watch as history repeats itself.
Morals are an often talked about matter, but what is morality? Not everyone is instilled with the same morals, so who’s morally right? Morality is an extremely difficult subject to grasp, which is why there is no set basis for it. What many may accept as morally right, others may view as morally wrong. Parents, media, and teachers affect many of us, but who is to say that they themselves are correct? I constantly question society, but I allow others to freely express their views. Who am I to judge when no true consensus of morality has been reached? August 6th, 1945, the United States became the first to release nuclear warfare, killing 80,000 lives of God instantly. Many staunchly defend the decision and believe the drop was both necessary and unavoidable. I myself listen to the infinite list of reasons, but I disregard it all. Regardless of the billions the United States spent creating the bomb and the saving of soldiers’ lives, neither of the two ...
The Songerweg emphasizes the particular model of history that Germany, unlike other Western countries, has gone through. Specifically, ‘proponents of this concept emphasize the peculiarities of German history, such as political institutions, social structures, or mentalities and experience, usually in comparison with other Western countries, to demonstrate the unique course of German history’ (Buse & Doerr, 1998, p. 934). Although initially the theory of Sonderweg viewed the characteristics of German historical development as positive, the situation has changed after the World War II. Specifically, in the 19th and early 20th centuries historians applied the Sonderweg model to stress a focus on the role of strong central state and military as the driving force of the development of the country (Buse & Doerr, 1998). In addition to this, historians regarded social reforms in Germany that were made from ‘above’ rather than being the outcomes of revolution to be a positive feature that depicted German state in a favorable way. Finally, the historical school viewed the course of German industrialization and culture as superior to similar processed in the rest of Western European
The Milgram experiment of the 1960s was designed to ascertain why so many Germans decided to support the Nazi cause. It sought to determine if people would be willing to contradict their conscience if they were commanded to do so by someone in authority. This was done with a psychologist commanding a teacher to administer an electric shock to a student each time a question was answered incorrectly. The results of the Milgram experiment help to explain why so many men in Nazi Germany were recruited to support the Nazi cause and serve as a warning against the use of “enhanced interrogation” techniques by the United States government.
The development of the atomic bomb and chemical warfare forever changed the way people saw the world. It was a landmark in time for which there was no turning back. The constant balancing of the nuclear super powers kept the whole of humankind on the brink of atomic Armageddon. Fear of nuclear winter and the uncertainty of radiation created its own form of a cultural epidemic in the United States. During these tense times in human history officials made controversial decisions such as the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Dangerous biological experiments and bombs tests were carried out in the name of the greater good and national defense. Some historians and scientists argue that the decisions and acts carried out by the U.S. during World War II and the Cold War were unethical because of the direct damage they did. The United States' decisions were moral because it can be proven their actions were aimed at achieving a greater good and those that were put in potential danger volunteered and were informed of the risk.
]Haffner, is a book which is hard to define. Only 165 pages long, Haffner has crammed more relevant information into this book than many twice its length. He observes Hitler's roller coaster ride through life and the country that he eventually took along. From Hitler's private life to the complete betrayal of Germany, Haffner evaluates the conditions and impetus for Hitler's accomplishments and failures. These include not only Hitler's psyche, but also the political arena of post World War I Europe.
Yarmolinsky, Adam. "The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code: Human Rights in Human Experimentation." The New England Journal of Medicine. N.p., 13 May 1993. Web. 05 Jan. 2014. .
In today’s society, many countries and even citizens of the United States question the U.S. government’s decision to get involved in nuclear warfare. These people deemed it unnecessary and stated that the U.S. is a hypocrite that preaches peace, but causes destruction and death. Before and during World War II the U.S. was presented with a difficult decision on whether or not to develop and use the atomic bomb. The U.S. decided to develop the atomic bomb based on the fear they had for the safety of the nation. In August 1939 nuclear physicists sent manuscripts to Albert Einstein in fear the Germany might use the new knowledge of fission on the uranium nucleus as way to construct weapons.
Fulbrook, Mary. A Concise History of Germany. 2nd ed. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.
Representing East Germany since Unification. From Colonization to Nostalgia? Paul Cooke. Berg. 2005 Germany since 1945. Lothar Kettenacker.
The Congress of Vienna in 1814-15 created the so-called German Confederation under Austrian and Prussian hegemony, but this unit disappointed the dreams of nationalists. The rivalry of Austria and Prussia paralyzed it in a way comparable to the effects of Soviet-American dualism on the United Nations during the Cold War. Almost everywhere, the old rulers repressed the nationalist movement after 1815. The German princes realized that nationalism required ...
Carr, William. A. A. The Origins of the Wars of German Unification. London: Longman Group, 1991. Hamerow, Theodore S. The Social Foundations of German Unification, 1858-1871.