Better open than closed.

  • Published In: New Scientist, 2025, v. 266, n. 3542. P. 5 1 of 2

  • Database: Academic Search Ultimate 2 of 2

Abstract

The article discusses the implications of suppressing scientific ideas due to potential consequences, using historical examples like Galileo Galilei's heliocentrism and the development of the atomic bomb. It questions whether scientific theories should be rejected based on their implications, emphasizing the importance of pursuing knowledge despite potential fallout. The text highlights the complexity of balancing scientific exploration with ethical considerations, ultimately advocating for the continuous opening of "Pandora's boxes" of knowledge. [Extracted from the article]

Additional Information

  • Source:New Scientist. 2025/05, Vol. 266, Issue 3542, p5
  • Document Type:Article
  • Subject Area:History
  • Publication Date:2025
  • ISSN:0262-4079
  • DOI:10.1016/s0262-4079(25)00722-5
  • Accession Number:184984406
  • Copyright Statement:Copyright of New Scientist is the property of New Scientist Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.