Scientific activity’s ethos by the example of the Manhattan Project
https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2023-4-128-142
Abstract
The article examines the ethos and motivation of the scientists of the Manhattan Project within the framework of their development of nuclear weapons. The empirical information is compared to R.K. Merton’s concept of scientific ethos, as well as L.M. Dmitrieva’s concept of truth-seeking and responsibility of scientists. The recollections of the leading scientific personnel of the Manhattan Project make up the main source of the research. The article consists of three parts. The first part examines the motivation of the scientists who participated in the Manhattan Project. The second part analyzes the relevance of the actions of the Manhattan Project scientists to R.K. Merton’s concept of the ethos of science. The last part of the article specifies the fundamental bases of scientific ethos with the help of L.M. Dmitrieva’s concept and compares the actions of the scientists of the Manhattan Project with the specified essentials. The research concludes with an outline of the main set of moral and ethical norms in scientific activity in the course of the Manhattan Project. The conclusions of the research are particularly relevant in the context of increasing international tensions and deep involvement of the scientific community in the process of improvement of both conventional and mass destruction weapons.
About the Author
I. A. Ripak
Saint Petersburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Il’ya A. Ripak, postgraduate student
1/3, Smolny St., Saint Petersburg, 191060
References
1. Dmitrieva, L.M. (2004), “Truth and responsibility of scientists”, Omskii nauchnyi vestnik, no. 2, pp. 5–10.
2. Merton, R.K. (1973), The sociology of science. Theoretical and empirical investigations, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.
3. Mirskaya, E.Z. (2005), “Merton and the ethos of classical science”, in Kiyashchenko, L.P. (ed.), Filosofiya nauki. Vyp. 11: Etos nauki na rubezhe vekov [Philosophy of science, no. 11: Ethos of science at the turn of century], Izdatel’stvo Instituta filosofii RAN, Moscow, Russia, pp. 4–34.
4. Pinker, S. (2021), Luchshee v nas: Pochemu nasiliya v mire stalo men’she [The better angels of our nature], Alpina non-fiction, Moscow, Russia.
5. Vizgin, V.P. (2005), “The ethos of an atomic scientist. Origins and genesis”, in Kiyashchenko, L.P. (ed.), Filosofiya nauki, vyp. 11: Etos nauki na rubezhe vekov [Philosophy of science, no. 11: Ethos of science at the turn of century], Izdatel’stvo Instituta filosofii RAN, Moscow, Russia, pp. 261–279.
6. Vizgin, V.P. (2008), “Genesis of the nuclear ethos: ‘We were creating such weapon for one purpose, that it can never be used’ ”, in Kiyashchenko, L.P. and Mirskaya, E.Z. (ed.), Etos nauki [Ethos of science], Academia, Moscow, Russia, pp. 478–499.
Review
For citations:
Ripak I.A. Scientific activity’s ethos by the example of the Manhattan Project. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin Series "Political Science. History. International Relations". 2023;(4):128-142. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2023-4-128-142
Views:
127
Email this article 