Abstract
In his Lectures on the Philosophy of History, Hegel opines that gunpowder is not
merely the result of human thought; rather, like Gutenberg’s printing press, it promotes human thinking. Put simply, gunpowder was required; hence it was invented
(see, Black 1973). John Forge’s latest book, The Morality of Weapons Research:
Why it is Wrong to Design Weapons, a contribution to the Springer Briefs in Ethics series, takes issue with this very aspect of intellectual endeavour. In a nutshell,
Forge contends that the invention, development, and improvement of weaponry via
‘applied’ research activity (21), understood in contemporary scientifc terms or prescientifc ones (18), is neither morally permissible nor excusable. Forge already
developed this argument in an earlier work, Designed to Kill: The Case Against
Weapons Research, which I have reviewed elsewhere (Forge 2013; Leveringhaus
2014). The Morality of Weapons Research presents his position in a slightly shorter
and more accessible format, with some subtle revisions of, as well as brief additions
to his original argument.