3 ms·

Fritz Haber is on this list. That's insane! The Haber-Bosch process enabled WW1 and WW2. It would have been simply impossible for Germany or any country to bui

Fritz Haber is on this list. That's insane! The Haber-Bosch process enabled WW1 and WW2. It would have been simply impossible for Germany or any country to build enough explosives for a world war without the ability to synthesize ammonium nitrate. By 1915 about half of the explosives used were ammonium nitrate-based. One of its many uses was enhance and pad out dynamite which could not be produced fast enough. In particular, both WW1 and WW2 would have ended very quickly for Germany without the Haber-Bosch process because of the naval blockade. "Master Mind: The Rise and Fall of Fritz Haber" by Daniel Charles makes the argument that WW1 could never have lasted more than a year or so without Haber's work. He also personally had a role in starting WW1, albeit a small one, by helping with and signing a manifesto of intellectuals in Germany that supported the idea of war. Never mind that Haber invented gas warfare (ironically and sadly, he was Jewish and his work would lead to the gas chambers). He was also an ardent supporter of chemical and gas warfare. He would give speeches about how good gas warfare is because there aren't many wounded soldiers left to care for, just the dead. Between WW1 and WW2 something like 100 million people died. Haber is not a figure that should appear on this list. In many ways he was also a tragic figure. From a hardcore nationalist, he was cast aside because he was Jewish. His wife committed suicide because of gas warfare during the battle of Ypres. His daughter committed suicide when her research on an antidote for gas warfare was cancelled. Many in his extended family were killed by the country he was such an ardent supporter of.

COGlory 3y ago
>Between WW1 and WW2 something like 100 million people died. Haber is not a figure that should appear on this list. OK, so instead of 1-2 billion, he's at 0.9 to 1.9 billion lives saved/enabled? You make a convincing argument for why he maybe wasn't a good person, but net, the Haber-Bosch process has enabled so many more people to live than it has enabled people to die. That's not a moral judgement, just pure numbers thing.
- hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
  I think your "lives saved/enabled" comment brings up a very important question, though. Is a life enabled worth the same thing as a life saved? More to the point in this equation, I think the murder of any individual is much worse than having technology limitations that prevent some people from being born in the first place. Without the Haber-Bosch process, the world population would be much, much smaller, that's undeniable. But the primary reason it would be smaller is so many people would have never been born - is that really a problem though?
  - COGlory 3y ago
    I reckon most of those people would prefer to have been born. So from an objectivist, population average view, perhaps not equivalent to a life saved. But to any individual, it seems to equate to their life being saved.
    - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
      > I reckon most of those people would prefer to have been born. Philosophically, this feels like such a weird statement to me. I'm quite sure I'd be 100% fine with never having been born, because there'd be nobody to care about the lack of me in the first place. There are of course an infinite number of people who were never born due to some small butterfly-effect missed connections.
  - swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
    If a family has ten kids, is that family worth more than 3x a family with just one child? That's what gets to me about utilitarian philosophy. By adding more people, something humans are good at, you're increasing the number of people that deserve moral consideration. The idea that every life is sacred leads to some trolley-problem level of moralizing
    - hulitu 3y ago
      > The idea that every life is sacred leads to some trolley-problem level of moralizing "And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space 'Cause there's bugger all down here on earth" "Can we take your liver now" ?
    - newyankee 3y ago
      Also the misplaced notion that all religious ideologies are same. Religions followed strictly promote procreation but they do not provide a solution for hunger, using limited resources of the world etc. I can also argue as an Indian that authoritarian Chinese growth over last 4 decades did more to remove people from poverty and increase quality of life (in the process also saving many lives, whatever the cost - 15k Tiananmen deaths etc.) than democratic India where till recently nothing seemed to get done due to corruption, mismanagement and people fighting over limited resources.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago
> The Haber-Bosch process enabled WW1 and WW2. Then he probably helped bring freedom to billions of people as well. WWI and WWII broke the back of European power and made it untenable for them to hold onto their colonies. Right before the outbreak of WWI, Europe as a whole controlled the majority of Africa, India, and had carved of China into zones of influence. WWI and the WWII broke them psychologically, financially, and demographically.
- hulitu 3y ago
  > Then he probably helped bring freedom to billions of people as well. That's why they thought. In reality they just changed masters.

COGlory 3y ago

>Between WW1 and WW2 something like 100 million people died. Haber is not a figure that should appear on this list. OK, so instead of 1-2 billion, he's at 0.9 to 1.9 billion lives saved/enabled? You make a convincing argument for why he maybe wasn't a good person, but net, the Haber-Bosch process has enabled so many more people to live than it has enabled people to die. That's not a moral judgement, just pure numbers thing.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
I think your "lives saved/enabled" comment brings up a very important question, though. Is a life enabled worth the same thing as a life saved? More to the point in this equation, I think the murder of any individual is much worse than having technology limitations that prevent some people from being born in the first place. Without the Haber-Bosch process, the world population would be much, much smaller, that's undeniable. But the primary reason it would be smaller is so many people would have never been born - is that really a problem though?
- COGlory 3y ago
  I reckon most of those people would prefer to have been born. So from an objectivist, population average view, perhaps not equivalent to a life saved. But to any individual, it seems to equate to their life being saved.
  - hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
    > I reckon most of those people would prefer to have been born. Philosophically, this feels like such a weird statement to me. I'm quite sure I'd be 100% fine with never having been born, because there'd be nobody to care about the lack of me in the first place. There are of course an infinite number of people who were never born due to some small butterfly-effect missed connections.
- swagasaurus-rex 3y ago
  If a family has ten kids, is that family worth more than 3x a family with just one child? That's what gets to me about utilitarian philosophy. By adding more people, something humans are good at, you're increasing the number of people that deserve moral consideration. The idea that every life is sacred leads to some trolley-problem level of moralizing
  - hulitu 3y ago
    > The idea that every life is sacred leads to some trolley-problem level of moralizing "And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space 'Cause there's bugger all down here on earth" "Can we take your liver now" ?
  - newyankee 3y ago
    Also the misplaced notion that all religious ideologies are same. Religions followed strictly promote procreation but they do not provide a solution for hunger, using limited resources of the world etc. I can also argue as an Indian that authoritarian Chinese growth over last 4 decades did more to remove people from poverty and increase quality of life (in the process also saving many lives, whatever the cost - 15k Tiananmen deaths etc.) than democratic India where till recently nothing seemed to get done due to corruption, mismanagement and people fighting over limited resources.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago

> The Haber-Bosch process enabled WW1 and WW2. Then he probably helped bring freedom to billions of people as well. WWI and WWII broke the back of European power and made it untenable for them to hold onto their colonies. Right before the outbreak of WWI, Europe as a whole controlled the majority of Africa, India, and had carved of China into zones of influence. WWI and the WWII broke them psychologically, financially, and demographically.

hulitu 3y ago
> Then he probably helped bring freedom to billions of people as well. That's why they thought. In reality they just changed masters.