“The Dilemma of the Scientist” by J. Bronowski is a science fiction story that delves into the moral and ethical dilemmas faced by scientists during the development of the atomic bomb. The story explores the profound responsibility that scientists carry when their discoveries have the potential to reshape the world, both positively and negatively. Read More English Summaries.
Dilemma of the Scientist Summary
Dilemma of the Scientist Summary in English
‘The Dilemma of the Scientist’ is a science fiction which explains the making of an atom bomb. The writer while narrating the super devastating weapon, says that it always haunted the scientist’s after its result in Nagasaki. Nagasaki was one of the victims which was devastated during the World War. Even the scientists think themselves how had they blundered. The writer puts this question before history which had witnessed the making of atomic bomb; The fission of Uranium was discovered by the two German scientists just a year before the War. Within a few months it was ready.
They were not sure whether it was atomic bomb. But one thing was sure that if the fission of Uranium could be used explosively it might in theory make an explosion a million times larger than the other. It was believed that the monopoly of such an atomic bomb would make Hitler. The Master of Europe and the world and slavey to the whole world. The Scientists were well aware of its devastating power. They alerted Albert Einstein w ho was a pacifist all his life. He never thought anything from one side. He thought it better to leave the nations, to use their conscience in making use of it. Before Hitler’s invasion in Poland Einstein alerted President Roosevelt about his apprehension of the use of the atomic bomb by the Germans.
Scientists in England, Canada and America also began making the atomic bomb. They did it thinking it to be their duty to use their skill in the interest of the nation. They were in the race against Germany. But the writer thinks that what the scientists did was pitiful. They created a series of devastation. However, the Germans failed but the allies succeeded in testing the first atomic bomb in July 1945. In the meantime Germany was defeated and Hitler was dead.
The scientists made a plea to President Truman against the decision of the use of the bomb. They were of the view that the demonstration of the bomb should be tested in deserted place but not on human habitation. However, it was ignored and Hiroshima and Nagasaki were made deserted.Scientists believed that the hydrogen bomb would change the scenario of the world. The nations would come to their senses about war. But the writer thinks, the wars are not made a unmade through weapons. The evil roots are the wars themselves.
Dilemma of the Scientist Summary Class 11
There is no logical sense in saying that such weapons should have not been discovered. Actually in a democracy we people are responsible for what happens. We do not change the world, by what w’e wish but by how we act.There is no escape from the choice which the community make between a bomb or no bomb, between planning a war or peace. Scientists have been employed for doing reasonably. They are the hangmen who have no choice whether to kill or no. It is none of their business to take a decision. They can’t dictate any policy. Community is responsible for such consequences.
Scientist should also be allowed to think as a free man. He should have right to think freely by his own conscience. If he detests war or thinks his research against humanity, he should be allowed to choose another job. Above all the dissenting scientists should be allowed to put their reasons and to express their views. They also bear the responsibility in the making of the society. It is the world in which scientists penetrate every sphere of life. In a democracy every man has the ability to form a judgement on every issue. Scientists, if willingly teach the community, can change the whole scenario. They can give a new meaning to our lives.
Dilemma of the Scientist Summary pdf
In fact they know’ the method to teach by which one can assure promises against achievement.
But the irony is that the man who has worked on the issue of life and death, guided a missile or hydrogen bomb is seldom free to speak as he would like. It is a great loss on the part of the whole community. There is no conforming or totalitarian science. The dilemma persists whether there would ever be an educated democracy.