Grey Matter
Sreeram Yashasvi, reporting from the Disarmament and International Security Council (DISEC), tries to untangle the creepers of illusion.
To do, or not to do? Will people know or will they not?
We humans often face this dilemma. Most of the important decisions we make tend to be in this state. We often have what we want and what we have to. It is human to want more. In these grey areas, we tend to choose things which make us feel good. There is science. Then there are morals. We prefer science because it is cold, raw facts that most of the times leads us to a clear-cut answer. Our morals, on the other hand, leads us into a never-ending web of viewpoints and rights or wrongs.
This century undeniably belongs to science. The ease of life that science has brought us is irreplaceable. The number of people dying has gone down drastically. We have invented cures for diseases which were previously thought incurable. Technology has made it possible for almost everyone to have access to education. Humanity has never been better off.
Yet this century seems to be a paradox in itself. We say we don't want war but we keep inventing newer and newer weapons. A small part of the population has an entire aisle of different cornflakes to choose from whereas some can't get two square meals per day. People are maintaining lawns in the middle of a desert while some are not guaranteed clean drinking water even after walking for 20 km. Examples of these kinds of paradoxes are galore.
Nevertheless, the futility of war seems to have finally sunk into our thick skulls. Our environment might prevent us from taking part in acts of war but the animal instincts are still alive. Somewhere deep down, we still enjoy hunting. It's not always visible but there's no denying its presence. Technology has only given us more excuses to cover this ugly side.
A huge chunk of modern research is devoted to biotechnology (the intersection of biology and engineering). This integration has caused seismic changes both in the field of engineering, as well as biology. The lines are already blurred. With the current rate of advancement, we may soon be gods ourselves. The highly disruptive nature of technology has caused foundational changes in several definitions. For example, cutting-edge research today is happening on "genome sequencing" which is basically decoding the DNA of a human for medical purposes. All the information can be accessed through the cloud. It is a highly ambitious project with humongous benefits.
But have we really considered all the possibilities of that information in the outside world? This may not seem dire now, but if this doesn't scare you enough now, it soon will. This is just one aspect of it. We, also have genetic engineering, tissue engineering, cyborg technologies (I see you smiling there, Victor Stone!).
Technologies like these has created an air of apprehension on what something means and what it doesn't. To put it simply, drafts can't keep up with science. Done are the days when battles were fought on a field with physical weapons. It is now possible to simply obliterate cities at the click of a button. The three heads of Cerberus are now Nuclear weapons, Biological weapons and Chemical weapons.
We have reached such a level in Nuclear technology that the collateral has become just too much. Chemical and Biological weapons are now improving rapidly thanks to science. We, after all, have a conscience. We have conventions in place that prevent the use of dangerous chemicals and biological weapons but these conventions also let countries use those same materials for "scientific purposes". History has shown accidents at these research laboratories and compounds is just as dangerous; be it Chernobyl or Fukushima or Sverdlovsk.
We claim the purpose of scientific research is to prepare ourselves for an eventuality or help us understand things better. We somehow always tend to ignore the 'what-if'.
We are now in a position where we don't have brakes to stop even if we want to. The wheels are already in motion. How much is too much?
