Science Teachers and the Atomic Bomb"" RICHARD M . NOYES California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California
T
HE atomic bomb is the dramatic symbol of the challenge presented to us by the development of scientific technology and by the present inability of mankind to control that technologyfor its best interest. That challenge faces all of us, but i t is the student generation of today that must develop its life within the framework of the atomic age. Therefore i t is imperative that the members of that generation should strive to understand the situation and to face i t resolutely. We teachers certainly cannot do our students' thinking for them, but we can encourage our students to consider the problems. I n the present situation i t appears to me that we science teachers, and especially teachers of pbysics and chemistry, have a golden opportunity and a special duty to arouse the interest of our students in some of the many problems arising from the development of the atomic bomb. The general nature and theory of the bomb itself is a fascinating subject tbat should be discussed in any course in general physics, but I thimk that we can and should give more than a mere exposition of the basic principles on which the bomb is based. The story of the development of this weapon provides a dramatic illustration of three important points about the nature of science itself that I believe should be brought home to students. In the first place, the history of atomic physics since the start of the twentieth century very effectively illustrates the nature of the scientific method and the growth of scientific truth. Students need to get some Idea of the nature of this growth and of the painstaking way in which discoveries are pyramided by careful study and exchange of information, Of course, the development of any major theory or branch of science provides an excellent opportunity to illustrate the growth of knowledge, but the history behind our present concepts of atomic structure is truly dramatic. An example that is frequently used to illustrate the scientific method is the controversy in the eighteenth century between the phlogiston and oxidation theories of combustion; however, Lavoisier, whose brilliant work settled the controversy, has been dead for over a hundred and fifty years, and students might well find this modem story more interesting and just as instructive. In the second place, the development of the atomic bomb is an excellent but by no means a unique illustration of the international nature of science. I believe that in this day of national rivalries we science teachers
-
1 Address given before the Southern California Science Teachen' Association on February 16,1946. Contribution number 1058 from the Gates and Crellin Laboratories of Chemistry. California Institute of Technology.
should go out of our way to point out the universality of 'scientific truth and the international foundation on which i t is based. Some patriots are trying to tell us that God gave us the bomb because we were the only nation that could be trusted with it. We must make i t clear that the bomb is not an All-American Gadget, but is the outgrowth of research to which workers in Austria, Germany, France, England, Russia, Denmark, Italy, and many other countries made important contributions. There is no reason to believe tbat the American developments of the chain-reacting pile and the detonation of fissionable material should not be steps toward additional discoveries which we cannot even imagine now. I believe that these points should be stressed in any discussion of the bomb. In the third place, I should like to emphasize the importance of the atomic bomb as an illustration of the impact of scientific technology upon society. Scientists are scientists primarily because they are afflicted with an insatiable curiosity. They want to know the truth about the universe in which they find themselves, and they are so concerned about this truth that they search for i t without any regard for the effect which the new knowledge will have upon their fellow men. We as teachers should impress upon our students that the many questions to which we seek the answers do not exist in compartmented fields of knowledge but are all problems connected with how man can best understand and enjoy the universe in which he lives. The atomic bomb is the most dramatic illustration of the fact that, regrettable as i t may be from the standpoint of pure science, the effects of scientific discoveries are so great that the scientists must be cognizant of these effects. It is very trite, but nevertheless true, to say that the so-called physical sciences, which seek primarily to interpret the behavior of inanimate matter and the lower organisms, have so far outstripped the so-called social sciences, which seek primarily to interpret human behavior and relationships, that we are faced with very serious difficulties in the application of technological advances. In fact, the discrepancy is so great that we are now able or shall soon be able to destroy our civilization unless we learn how to solve the social problems that beset us. Up to now I have been talking about concepts that should be presented to all students. The success or failure of the coming generation will in large measure be determined by its ability to adapt itself to the unprecedented situations arising from large-scale technological developments affecting all mankind. Many of these developments and their attendant problems are already upon u s ; we cannot doubt that the future
343
holds more discoveries and more problems. There- obviously need an ever-increasing proportion of techfore, every student who takes a course in science as a nically-trained men, and even the present supply is woepreparation for citizenship in the new world should ' f d y inadequate to the demand; however, the very sense the nature of the scientific method and the im- backwardness of the social sciences as opposed to the physical sciences emphasizes their need. pact of scientific development upon society. However, in addition to the students whose conI am well aware of the sorry comparison that must tact with science is confined to one or two courses, there be made a t the present time between economics and are a few who have the interest and ability to go farther. chemistry. The social sciences do not have the backIn a recent cartoon a mother is saying to her son, "Why ground of accepted fact that is fundamental to the do you want to be a scientist; isn't there enough trouble physical sciences. They do not even have adequate in the world already?" Such a defeatist attitude can- techniques for obtaining such facts; however, the not be condemned too strongly. Science is not evil, difficulties are not insurmountable, and the growth of but the discoveries of science may be put to evil pur- the physical sciences illustrates the power of concerted, poses; therefore, we should encourage our more able logical, unbiased application of the human intellect to students in their desires to become physical scientists, difficult problems. We cannot yet say how effectively but we should try to impart to them both a feeling of men with a scientific background and outlook can atresponsibility for interpreting their discoveries to the tack the still more difficult problems of human relapublic and a social conscience about what is done with tions, but i t is my firm conviction that the application those discoveries. of the mental disciplines that have characterized the I should like to go even further, and perhaps as a growth of the physical sciences can lead to the developchemist I may be permitted to say something that you ment of improved techniques in the gathering of data would not easily tolerate from an economist or a psy- about social problems and can ultimately lead to soluchologist. I believe that it is very desirable that we en- tions for some of the social ills that now beset us. courage men with proper interests and abilities to go Therefore, I believe that the present lack of any branch into the social sciences rather than into the physical of knowledge that can rightly be called a science of sciences into which similar members of the past gener- human behavior and relationships should not be used ation would have gone. I wish to make i t very clear to scare able young men away but should be thrown in that I do not make this recommendation because I their faces as a challenge. I ask you as teachers of the believe that men should be discouraged from entering generation that must live with the atomic bomb to the fields of the physical sciences; our civilization will encourage your best students to face that challenge.
