Ethics and Weapon Development

The Weapons Development Debate

Much of the world's technology is stimulated by weapons development. Considering the scope of the projects, both in cost and manpower, it is no surprise that many ethical debates become paramount and deserve serious discussions. For some engineers, involvement in weapons development conflicts with personal conscience, for others it is a fulfillment to participate in national defense. I argue that military research is an established order of scientific investigation and is more often on the moral side of the line. Some ask if scientists who create military arms and who earn their livelihoods from the sale are responsible for their use. By a certain measure, they must be undoubtedly held accountable, for they surely know that the results of their labors are being used for the missions of the Uniter States which are no always simply the defense of American homes and freedom. So each scientist must check their principles and determine if they are in line with the nature of their work. Researchers also have a loyalty to their employer and the government to continue the work they were assigned. When they weigh their principles regarding military work they also need to consider the responsibilities towards their employer and the trust formed there. Many researchers are tide with contracts with their employers and leaving on grounds regarding the possible use of their work can also be considered unethical. Applying rule utilitarianism requires one create a system of rules designed to promote human happiness or increase preference satisfaction. This can be expanded with rule deontology which regards types of actions as right or wrong. Instead of considering the morality of each act, rule deontologists create a set of principles to guide their actions. This can be applied with weapons research. The engineers should determine their ethical stance by creating a set of principles that determine if the impact of their work benefits both society and themselves more then not. I believe that in most practical circumstances it does. The development of non-military technology that has been done based on the research of military weapons warrants the research alone. Many inventions have come to benefit the public as a result of projects developed by the military for their own purposes such as lasers, radar, pesticides, processed food, satellites, and even non-lethal firearms used by police forces throughout the world. However it is important to realize that it is not the responsibility of military researchers as to what to do with the weapons. Only the weapons user is capable of being either moral or immoral. I think that the research is working in their best interest by completing the work they are assigned. The simple argument that “if I don't do it, someone else will” is very true in many regards. The US DOD federal budget alloted 127 billion for investment in research and development. If one researched choices to remove themselves from a project they will be replaced promptly. As such scientists and engineers are dedicated to science not politics. I believe that researchers should always question the ethics issues behind their work. However when it comes to the research here, they should be free to discover any principle, remaining free from any political scrutiny over their work.