• 116
  • 2
  • 2
  • English 
Apr 6, 2019 06:58
The level of development that we are nowadays is partly due to the research and testing that scientists have done throughout history. Big achievements have been accomplished in important fields of the knowledge such as chemistry, physics, or medicine. I nevertheless, oppose to give scientists full freedom to test as they wish to because it might eventually carry tremendous harm.

The reason why I think scientists should not have full autonomy to develop their experiments is because it could do great harm to the population. Scientists might -consciously or unconsciously- be advancing in creating technologies that, in the future could jeopardize people and animal’s lives. Science carries a huge responsibility, and as such, it should be summited to proper supervision in order for all the population to be safe. An example widely known for the people to as why science activity should be supervised is the atomic bomb. Back in the Second World War, they probably meant well when they decided to support this development. They wanted to guarantee their citizens safety; at the end nevertheless, the atomic bomb produced the death of hundreds of innocent people.

While science has given the human race marvelous discoveries and advantages to the human race, it has also caused big catastrophes. The best option, therefore, would be to have entities to oversee scientists’ activities. In order for researchers not to be unfairly banned or restricted, these entities should be independent from the different branches of power of a given country.

All in all, although scientists’ findings have been beneficial to us all, it is also true that they have caused harm to the human race and the Earth, I believe that scientists should not be given full freedom to test whatever they want because of the immense consequences that it can lead to.