Undoubtedly, scientists are responsible for their inventions, and they should understand that their achievements may be both beneficial and harmful for humanity. Even if they create something in the name of technical progress, it is essential to foresee the possible consequences, such as the destruction of cities and deaths of people. Thus, a scientist inventing a new kind of weapon carries much more ethical responsibility than a person who makes tires for military vehicles. While the second works to supply the country with necessary materials for its ability to defend itself, the first possesses the power of knowledge that can negatively influence the whole world.
Today, most scientists concentrate on solving global problems connected, for instance, to ecology or serious diseases. Due to the COVID-19 epidemic, members of the scientific community from various countries are working persistently to develop vaccines and ways of treatment. However, not every problem can make people worldwide unite their efforts to improve the welfare of humanity. At the time of World War I, the scientists in every country focused on contributing to the victory over the enemy, regardless of the costs. That especially concerned Germany, “completely unprepared for modern warfare” and desperately searching for new technologies (“Haber,” p. 5). Therefore, it is hard to approve Haber’s decision, but possible to understand him. The role of scientists now and 100 years ago drastically differ.
Although Haber’s invention of chemical weapons led to catastrophic outcomes, such as numerous deaths during wartime, this is not the sole reason he is so well-known. His discovery of ammonia synthesis and the creation of synthetic fertilizer show exceptional scientific potential and the determination to facilitate people’s lives. Before the war outbroke, Haber had already proved to be a talented chemist with “a stunning ability to take scientific theories and apply them practically” (“Haber,” p. 3). That is why he deserves to be recognized, and obtaining the Nobel Prize can be considered a logical result of his work.
Evidently, it was hard for Clara Haber to be the wife of such an ambiguous person as Fritz. When she had to abandon her successful career, she hardly knew what would happen and why her husband would become one of the most notorious chemists. Perhaps, if she did not sacrifice her scientific work, she would pursue a noble goal and make discoveries to help humanity. Her suicide was a cry of despair of a scientist and a woman, probably aimed at reminding her husband that nothing can justify the tragedy of human death. Although the deliberate loss of life is usually considered senseless, it seems that Clara could not find another way to deal with her hardship.
It happens that outstanding people are known both for their decent and dreadful deeds. That is the case of Fritz Haber because even though his contribution to science is great, for many, he remains the father of chemical warfare that killed thousands of innocent people. It can be seen from the film that he suffered from being obliged to create such a cruel weapon (Khan, 2020). What appeared to be surprising is that he struggled to combine his consuming career with private life and even tried to help his wife to get back to work. These facts shed light on his personality and prove he was not only a villain and a hero but also a hostage to his talent.
References
Haber: The father of chemical warfare [PDF document].
Khan, Ayman. (2020). Fritz Haber – movie by Daniel Ragussis [Video]. YouTube.