Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site unm-la.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!lanl!dspo!unm-la!peter
From: peter@unm-la.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: physics and history (Reply to David Harwood)
Message-ID: <283@unm-la.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 28-Apr-85 13:09:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: unm-la.283
Posted: Sun Apr 28 13:09:57 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 29-Apr-85 06:59:05 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: Univ. of New Mexico, Los Alamos
Lines: 55


In article <335@cvl.UUCP> david@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) writes:

>It is good for you to inform us that you are a physicist...but I would
>rather have you inform us of your moral reservations about the military
>research of physicists.  I suppose that you are employed at Los Alamos, and I
>would be very interested in your views.
    
     I had initially declined to answer David publicly.  But after some private
exchanges, I have agreed to answer him publicly.  He has agreed to allow me to
summarize the views he expressed to me privately over the net.

     From our private correspondence, I understand David to be a very moral
and religious human being who considers working on any project funded by
a military contract to be immoral.  I consider this commendable considering
his pacifist ideology.

     As a non-christian, I am confused as to his beliefs that non-pacifism
is a contradiction of the gospels.  Many of the more bellicose people I am
acquainted with happen to be very zealous christians.  One of the local pastors
here in Los Alamos works in one of the weapons divisions.

     I myself view the morality of working on scientific research funded
by defense contracts somewhat cautiously.  On the one hand, I accept
the need for a nation (especially a democratic one like the United States)
to provide for its own defense.  On the other hand, it is impossible to ensure
that research knowledge gained will never be misused by those in power.

     I do not view all wars as immoral (e.g., the war against fascism in
1939-1945).  I am not a pacifist.  Though I have high regard for David's
principles, I cannot understand them in a world containing an Iran and a
South Africa. 

     I appreciate the fact that David does not blame scientists for the
misuse of science by those in power.  Unfortunately, some scientists have
not been blameless.  But in a broader sense, no citizen is blameless when
a government misuses the power given to it by it's citizenry.

     For personal reasons, I find it hard to relate to a few of my       
colleagues on a personal or humanistic basis.  But I will not condemn them
for choosing employment in research laboratories set up by the citizenry
of this nation to provide for their own defense.

     For whatever reason, many of David's fellow christians either do not
agree with his pacifist ideologies or do not abide by them.  This is  
historically understandable, since from the times of Constantine, Christianity
has been one of the more aggressive ideological movements in history.

    The Jewish prophets foresaw a time when a nation will not lift up sword
against another nation. This may be ambiguous from a Christian perspective
since their messiah has already come.  But in an age witnessing the
destruction of six million Jews in Christian Europe, I will not trust
in man what I hope of G-d.
-- 
bill peter                                 ihnp4!lanl!wkp