Question

We find that the progress of science has enormously increased man's power over the forces of
nature. Is it a good thing that man's power over the forces of nature should be increased? That
surely depends on the manner in which this power is used, and this depends again on the moral
nature of man. When we observe, as we may truly observe, especially at the present time, that
of all the single applications which man has made of science, the most extensive and perhaps
the most efficient is that of devising implements for destroying his brother mat is at least
permissible to raise the question whether the progress of science has contributed on the whole
to the progress of humanity. Had it not been for the progress of science, which has enormously
increased the wealth of the world, it is doubtful if this war, which is mainly a war about wealth,
would have taken place at all. Or if a war had broken out, it would not have involved the
appalling destruction of human life and property we are now witnessing-such that, within a
space of two years, about six million human beings have been killed, thirty-five millions
wounded, and wealth destroyed to the extent of about fifteen thousand millions
sterling-though some say it is very much more. Science taught us to make this wealth Science
has also taught us how to destroy it. When one thinks of how much of this is attributable to the
progress of science, I say it is permissible to raise the question whether man is a being who can
safely be entrusted with that control over the forces of nature which science gives him. What if
he uses this power, as he plainly can do, for his own undoing? To ask this, as we can hardly help
asking, is to transfer the question of scientific progress into the sphere of morality. It is
conceivable that the progress of science might involve for us no progress at all. It might be, and
some have feared that it may become, a step towards the self-destruction of the human race.​

Answer 1

Answer:

op

Explanation:

PLEASE MARK AS BRAINLIEST