Should a scientific discovery which has nothing but dangerous consequences for mankind be made public?

Should a scientific discovery which has nothing but dangerous consequences for manking be made public?

Attempt to formulate your 'moral' views on the practice of science . Imagine yourself stumbling upon a discovery, which has great academic interest but is certain to have nothing but dangerous consequences for the human society . How , if at all will you resolve your dilemma ?

Discovery of which made genetic engineering possible ?

One of the most important things to notice about the power of art is the way in which great works continue to exert their influence through the ages. Scientific discoveries which are of major importance at the time when they are made are superseded. Thus, Newton's theory of gravitation has been superseded by Einstein's theory of relativity. Hence the work of great scientists has value in stages on the way to a goal which supersedes them. Broadly speaking, the achievements of generals, politicians, and statesmen have an importance only in their own time. Hence these people and their acts, great as they may have been are like milestones which mankind passes on its way to something else. But with works of art it is not so. The place which they occupy in the estimation of succeeding ages and the power which they exercise over men's spirits are as great as they were in the age which produced them, indeed, their power tends to increase with time, as they came to be better understood. The power of art can be judged through

One of the most important things to notice about the power of art is the way in which great works continue to exert their influence through the ages. Scientific discoveries which are of major importance at the time when they are made are superseded. Thus, Newton's theory of gravitation has been superseded by Einstein's theory of relativity. Hence the work of great scientists has value in stages on the way to a goal which supersedes them. Broadly speaking, the achievements of generals, politicians, and statesmen have an importance only in their own time. Hence these people and their acts, great as they may have been are like milestones which mankind passes on its way to something else. But with works of art it is not so. The place which they occupy in the estimation of succeeding ages and the power which they exercise over men's spirits are as great as they were in the age which produced them, indeed, their power tends to increase with time, as they came to be better understood. How is a work of art different from the work of a scientist ?

Which important discovery was made by Oersted ?