July 16, 1945. In the New Mexico desert, an unprecedented fireball rose into the sky. A huge mushroom cloud followed, relentlessly capturing the blue of the sky. This horrific scene heralded a new era that would add new tragedies to human history.
78 years ago, the nuclear age began with this first atomic bomb test led by physicist Robert Oppenheimer. As the dreadful mushroom cloud covered the sky, Oppenheimer uttered the words: “Now I am death, destroyer of worlds.”
It wasn’t unfair either. Right after this first atomic bomb test, the United States dropped two atomic bombs. On August 6 and 9, 1945, they targeted the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, respectively. Nearly 200,000 Japanese, mostly civilians, died. The effect of radiation persisted for years, creating different problems.
Science that kills
Robert Oppenheimer went down in history as the father of the atomic bomb. He was the son of a German immigrant family living in New York. He studied at Harvard University. He learned Latin. He excelled in physics and chemistry. He was interested in Eastern philosophy. He worked in England to do research at Cambridge University.
After the 1939 invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany, Albert Einstein wrote to the US government. He warned of the dangers posed by the Nazis’ possible nuclear bombing.
President Franklin Roosevelt initiated a project to use nuclear energy for military purposes. Physicist Robert Oppenheimer was appointed as the scientist of this secret project called the Manhattan Project.
After the first atomic bomb test in the New Mexico desert, Oppenheimer was happy and exuberant. However, Oppenheimer’s opinion quickly changed after the atomic bomb he ignited was used on August 6. It was first used on Hiroshima and three days later on Nagasaki.
To him, the Nagasaki bombing was an unnecessary decision. He did not hesitate to express it. The President told Harry Truman that he had ‘blood on his hands’. Truman turned to the Assistant Secretary of State. The Assistant Secretary was there with the arrogance of his war victory. The politician expressed his despair. He said, “He is… I don’t want to see his child in this office again.”
Science had done its job. But, by creating a deadly weapon, he had contributed uniquely to writing another bloody tragedy in human history. Worst of all, there was no turning back, the genie was out of the bottle once…
The two axes of science: good or evil
Director Christopher Nolan’s new film “Oppenheimer” is set to bring the story to the big screen. It focuses on the creator of the atomic bomb. This happens at a time when the world is once again worried about new technologies. These technologies threaten the future of humanity.
Advances in machine learning and artificial intelligence also raise critical questions with references from tragic examples from the past. Will new technologies take humanity to a better place or will it exacerbate acute problems? How can we make sure that new technologies work for the benefit of all humanity? How can we prevent them from going against its values and interests?
Scientists like Oppenheimer and Einstein focused most of their efforts on what artificial intelligence researchers today call the “adaptation” problem. Especially in their recent years, they asked: how do we get our discoveries to serve us rather than destroy us?
Concrete approaches need to be put forward in the face of these common but increasingly urgent problems of every age.
Many worry about the use of complex and opaque machine learning algorithms in decision-making. This concern is significant in areas such as justice, hiring, and healthcare. These algorithms might invisibly reinforce existing discrimination and inequality.
There are fears about artificial intelligence applications that develop using existing human prejudices. These applications may widen the gap in areas such as inclusivity, gender equality, ethics, and morality. We are currently trying to close these gaps.
Another justice?
Some technology developers aim to introduce their creations into all areas of our lives. They are working on algorithms that will offer this “justice”. But for this, a consensus on the concept of justice itself is required.
Justice is not a mathematical constant or a variable. This is an extremely human value. Even for the definition of justice, there are often competing and even contradictory views in society. Just like the self-interested definition of reality as different truth or post-truth. In my opinion, it is a very possible risk that concepts like “substitute justice” will emerge.
As humanity crosses a revolutionary threshold, we will see. Will it learn from old devastating wounds? Or will it write new tragedies in history? The determinant, as always, will be the preferences of humanity…
Sources:
https://www.britannica.com/biography/J-Robert-Oppenheimer
https://www.history.co.uk/articles/oppenheimer-and-the-manhattan-project
https://www.nps.gov/whsa/learn/historyculture/trinity-site.htm
https://www.wsj.com/articles/j-robert-oppenheimers-defense-of-humanity-d83903b3
Discover more from ActNow: In Humanity We Trust
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.