by It would be impossible to study the history of technological and scientific growth without addressing moments of great human conflict. Aside from weapons and other developments made for the unique purpose of waging war, many of humanity’s most significant achievements have been accelerated and refined due to instances of combat. Take, for example, the two greatest known conflicts in human history. From the horrors of the first World War arose everything from sanitary napkins to new scientific management techniques. Meanwhile, World War II is largely responsible for the development of items such as radar, penicillin, and computers. These and other key human advancements provide a silver lining of sorts, reminding us that human creativity has persisted even throughout some of the the most deadly and unhappy moments in world history.
Of course, it is rather easy to argue that innovations with such widespread usage outside of war are indicators of positive progress. How should we look at those developments, frequently technological, whose most notable uses are as weapons of war? Gunpowder – originally invented with medicinal uses in mind – found an entirely different application when the Chinese applied it to warfare. But while some might see gunpowder’s modernization of fighting through rockets, guns, and cannons as an unfortunate and destructive point in human history, I would contest that even the most deadly developments serve a purpose in their own right.
Statistically speaking, our modern era is by far the least violent period of observable human history. And while atrocities of all kinds grace the front pages of media outlets across the world, I believe that these stories of human conflict sell so well because they provoke outrage among the vast numbers of modern humans who have never known anything close to true wartime suffering. So, if we take a step back from the emotional stories of modern human strife, it is not impossible to appreciate how far we as a species have come in building an immensely interconnected global society. Crucial to the relative peace of our world today is the concept of mutually assured destruction, which arose primarily as a result of the Cold War between the United States and the USSR. With immense nuclear firepower now shared between numerous prominent nations, it is well known that no country can utilize these ultra-destructive weapons without themselves being obliterated in the process.
Would it be preferable for our most powerful nations to coexist without the ever-looming threat of nuclear annihilation? Of course. But it is a simple fact that human nature alone does not guarantee ethical treatment of others. Without an event as destructive as the First World War, we may have gone much longer without the famed Geneva Convention, which outlines basic rights afforded to every human – even those on opposite sides of warring nations. It is for this reason that I believe even the most destructive examples of wartime science and technology have “benefitted” humanity in bringing us to this modern world in which we live – a world in which we understand the fully catastrophic potential of total war, and will do our best to avoid unneeded conflict.