A favourite recurring theme in sci-fi is holding science accountable for its own progress and inventions.
One of my first short stories ever written didn't deal exactly with that, but the element existed in the story. The story was a runner-up in some contest and to my surprise, many of the judges' comments related to this aspect of the story. They were impressed with the moral ramifications of cloning and genetic engineering I was able to bring forth.
This got me thinking of course (well, what doesn't get me thinking?). Do writers have a moral responsibility? And if they do, to what extent?
We all have different morals. For example, a story about a pregnant teen can take different directions depending on the writer. We put ourselves and our morals in the stories we write. We can't help it.
A beautiful post from Patry Francis (does she have any other kind?) over at The Marvelous Garden about the unlikable protagonists stuck in my memory. Don't we also sometimes use morally questionable characters to accentuate our true beliefs? We make these hateful characters... just that - hateful, so as to contrast with virtues they should have.
I don't have any answers (do you?), but I think it is almost inescapable for a writer to put himself inside the story and thus make the story morally compatible with his own nature.
"Joseph Rotblat was the only scientist to resign from the Manhattan Project and later received the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to rid the world of atomic weapons."
Nobel Peace Prize Winner Joseph Rotblat Dies
There is always the flip side of course. Here is the latest weapon invention burning bullets.
Categories: writing, science, general