Edward Teller Quotes

To address questions of scientific responsibility does not necessarily imply that one needs technical competence in a particular field (e.g. biology) to evaluate certain technical matters.

Though many have tried, no one has ever yet explained away the decisive fact that science, which can do so much, cannot decide what it ought to do.

I do feel a responsibility to address things that are problematic, but I don't have to go out of my way to do that.

At the end of the day, if there are truly ethical considerations, those have to override scientific considerations.

My doctrine is this, that if we see cruelty or wrong that we have the power to stop, and do nothing, we make ourselves sharers in the guilt.

It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even the most enormous wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support.

doing what is right is easy. The problem is knowing what is right

Scientists, therefore, are responsible for their research, not only intellectually but also morally. This responsibility has become an important issue in many of today's sciences, but especially so in physics, in which the results of quantum mechanics and relativity theory have opened up two very different paths for physicists to pursue. They may lead us - to put it in extreme terms -- to the Buddha or to the Bomb, and it is up to each of us to decide which path to take.

Every generation will be challenged morally once in their life about its government, and they will have to say where they stand.

Should I be the one to play God? We're both about the same age, but we grew up in different neighborhoods.

If it comes down to your ethics vs. a job, choose ethics. You can always find another job.

As long as I take the responsibility of the choice, I have to make the choice that is as right as possible.

This whole business of Trade gives me to pause and think, as it constitutes false relations between men; inasmuch as I am prone tocount myself relieved of any responsibility to behave well and nobly to that person who I pay with money, whereas if I had not that commodity, I should be put on my good behavior in all companies, and man would be a benefactor to man, as being himself his only certificate that he had a right to those aids and services which each asked of the other.

The trouble is that once you see it, you can't unsee it. And once you've seen it, keeping quiet, saying nothing, becomes as political an act as speaking out. There's no innocence. Either way, you're accountable.

Suppose that I see a hungry child in the street, and I am able to offer the child some food. Am I morally culpable if I refuse to do so? Am I morally culpable if I choose not to do what I easily can about the fact that 1000 children die every hour from easily preventable disease, according to UNICEF? Or the fact that the government of my own "free and open society" is engaged in monstrous crimes that can easily be mitigated or terminated? Is it even possible to debate these questions?

You have to help another person. But it's not right to play God with masses of people. To be God you have to know what you're doing. And to do any good at all, just believing you're right and your motives are good isn't enough.

Ethics is inescapable.

I don't think there is a particular responsibility on designers that is not on other professions... I think there's a responsibility for all of us to engage on all levels.

You can't be neutral on a moving train.

I felt I had a responsibility to do the right thing. And then I wanted to do the right thing by my family and there was no handbook.

We have many responsibilities, and one cannot expect the full blessings of a kind Providence if he neglects any major duty. A man has duties to his church, his home, his country, and his profession or job.

It is placing the Executive and the Movement in an absolutely wrong position to be taking your conscience round from body to body asking to be told what you ought to do with it.

As for academics, I do not see why their responsibilities as moral agents should differ in principle from the responsibilities of others; in particular, others who also enjoy a degree of privilege and power, and therefore have the responsibilities that are conferred by those advantages.

The right to do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

Playing by the rules, one does the best he can, irrespective of the social consequences. Whereas in making the rules, people ought to be concerned with the social consequences and not with their personal interests.