The Theatre of Science

As with religion, science cannot be separated from its intrinsic moral dimension. In other words, against the common opinion, science is not only good, and not even neutral; it is at the service of a privileged group, it is politically right-wing. Of course we are talking about science in general and not about some particular tendencies or branches. If Albert Einstein obtained the Nobel Prize it was not because of the absolute relevance or the goodness of his achievements, but because his theories allowed a privileged group to prevail over others. Thus science is at the same time beneficial for some and harmful for others. As in morality in general, science comprises both a good and an evil side, and it is for that reason a means by which the "sacrificial mechanism" (René Girard, Violence and the Sacred, 1972) operates.

In this respect we could also say that science works like theatre: with the same carpentry they can perform a comedy or a tragedy, nuclear medicine or the atomic bomb, a healing or a murdering. This is why there is no scientist innocent: they all serve at the same time the good and to the evil. They can believe that they work only for good purposes, but the fact is that the apparent neutrality of the scientific language already allows for any application, both good and evil.

Image after Édouard Joseph Dantan's Un entracte à la Comédie-Française un soir de première (1886) [pd] and others [ua-fu/fd].