Perspectives

Film
J Robert Oppenheimer and the social responsibility of science
The films of British-American director his counterpart in the German wartime scientist Edward Teller, who testified
Christopher Nolan have never lacked “uranium project”), we understand that against his former boss during the
for ambition, but with Oppenheimer he is brilliant, unworldly, charismatic, hearings. By that stage Oppenheimer,
he deserves credit merely for making arrogant, and rather careless about who had initially endorsed research
the attempt. The scientific and political

© Universal Pictures. All Rights Reserved.

the feelings of others. It has been on the hydrogen bomb, had decided
career of the mercurial American speculated that only someone with such that a Cold War arms race towards vast
physicist J Robert Oppenheimer a cluster of traits could have piloted the arsenals of these terrifyingly destructive
(1904–67) is a complex and tangled tale Manhattan Project to its fateful success, weapons was madness.
that has inspired several biographies; culminating in the Trinity Test in New After the high drama of the Trinity
Nolan’s film is loosely based on the Mexico’s Los Alamos desert, USA, in Test, the hearings provide a lengthy
epic tome, American Prometheus: July, 1945 and then the devastating epilogue to Nolan’s film. We are
The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in left in no doubt that Oppenheimer Oppenheimer
Oppenheimer (2005), by Kai Bird and Japan less than a month later. suffered a grave injustice, but Nolan Written and directed by
Christopher Nolan
Martin J Sherwin. And the Manhattan makes it clear that Oppenheimer’s
Project to build the first nuclear bombs “…should scientific advisers naivety and indiscretion also played
Universal Pictures, 2023
https://www.universalpictures.
during World War 2, which Oppenheimer remain silent about policy a part. According to political scientist co.uk/micro/oppenheimer

led, was an enterprise of unprecedented decisions or political actions Joseph Haberer in his book of 1969,
scope with a vast cast of characters, likely to be injurious to public Politics and the Community of Science,
most successfully documented in health? Would that position Oppenheimer “went through the
Richard Rhodes’ equally monolithic suffice when it comes to, say, hearing as if mesmerized”. Haberer
book The Making of the Atomic Bomb nuclear weapons or climate wrote that Oppenheimer “was either
(1986). Oppenheimer tries to tell both unwilling or unable to defend himself
change?”
stories, and in 3 hours it does about as in an appropriate way…he acted as a
well as one could reasonably expect. Oppenheimer was just as careless with victim, knowingly acquiescing in his
The film is thoughtful and nuanced, as his own personal affairs. Having flirted own destruction”. Nolan hints that
well as beautifully crafted and acted. with Communist circles in the USA in Oppenheimer saw the hearings as a kind
Yet inevitably it remains a partial his youth—he was a firm supporter of of exculpation for having unleashed the
telling, not only because of characters the anti-fascist resistance in Spain— awful power of the atom bomb: if he
and events it omits or simplifies but he continued a relationship with was martyred politically, people might
also because Oppenheimer’s story is psychiatrist and Communist Party of forgive him morally.
merely a signpost to wider themes: America member Jean Tatlock (a rather Yet it is hard to know anything for sure
the relationship of science to the cramped role for Florence Pugh) while about the motives of so complicated an
political context in which it operates, his wife Kitty looked after their child individual as Oppenheimer. Thus, while
and the social responsibilities of the (conceived while Kitty was still with her Haberer says in his book, one of the first
scientist. And in this respect the man previous husband). Such associations studies of the political responsibilities
himself—commandingly portrayed with Communists (Kitty, played in the of science in the nuclear age, that the
by Cillian Murphy, who captures film by an under-used Emily Blunt, had case of Oppenheimer “is worthy of
Oppenheimer’s gaunt, haunted herself been a party member) were special attention in that it illustrates
isolation—was frustratingly obtuse. central to the hearings of the Atomic
By the time we have watched the Energy Commission in 1954, when
young Oppenheimer progress from Oppenheimer’s security clearance was
a graduate student in the laboratory revoked and his career as a scientific
of the physicist Patrick Blackett at adviser to the US Government
Cambridge University, UK (where, on effectively ended. In the McCarthyite
© Universal Pictures. All Rights Reserved.

the verge of a breakdown, he nearly climate of the 1950s, Oppenheimer was

poisons Blackett with a cyanide-laden deemed a security risk.
apple, a possibly apocryphal story) and Another main factor in that outcome
with Max Born at the University of was Oppenheimer’s resistance to the
Göttingen, Germany (where he meets post-war hydrogen bomb project,
Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg, later championed by Manhattan Project

www.thelancet.com Vol 402 August 5, 2023 441

 Perspectives

the dynamic relationship of scientists Sir Patrick Vallance seems to take that about nuclear weapons to avoid an arms
to government with extraordinary position when he has stated that his race. “He scolded us like schoolboys”,
clarity”, it is also, like the man himself, duty during the COVID-19 pandemic Bohr told his son Aage later. “We did
a somewhat gnomic example. In his was to present ministers with the not speak the same language.”
public comments, Oppenheimer often unvarnished facts, as far as they were The formalisation of scientific
sought refuge in what philosopher known, and to do all he could to ensure advice to the UK Government after
Karl Jaspers criticised as “sophisticated they were understood—but then to World War 2 (during the war Churchill
aestheticism”, characterised by “phrases accept that the policies that ensued relied heavily on advice from physicist
that are existentially confusing, were not his to shape or to critique. The Frederick Lindemann) culminating in
seductive, and soporific”. On the unanswered question is what duties the role recently filled by Vallance as well
surface, Haberer wrote, Oppenheimer also exist towards the general public. as advisory bodies, such as the Scientific
“appeared to accept the idea of the For example, should scientific advisers Advisory Group for Emergencies,
social responsibility of science. On closer remain silent about policy decisions or made sense. But with formal duties
examination, this often dissolves into political actions likely to be injurious potentially comes less freedom to speak
elusive ambiguity.” to public health? Would that position one’s mind—let alone “truth to power”.
Haberer felt that such “moral suffice when it comes to, say, nuclear All the same, Haberer’s harsh judgement
obtuseness” was rather typical of weapons or climate change? The answer of scientists’ failures to recognise social
scientists when asked to pronounce may not be clear or obvious, but the responsibilities—“scientific leadership
on the responsibilities of science in question should be acknowledged. has tended, almost without exception,
governance. He criticised them for But sometimes there is only so much to acquiesce in any fundamental
“their incapacity to define, delineate scientists can do. Oppenheimer uses confrontation with the state”—would
or even to recognize the nature of the to good effect its subject’s famous be unfair today. Even by 1957 some of
problem of responsibility”. Rather, they response to the question asked during the nuclear scientists had begun the
asked only to “be held responsible for the 1954 hearing: when did he first Pugwash Conferences on Science and
the calibre of their scientific work”. As develop moral convictions against World Affairs that aimed to stop nuclear
Peter Debye, the Dutch physicist who the hydrogen bomb? Oppenheimer proliferation; one of the organisation’s
held a powerful position in German responded: “When it became clear to architects, physicist Joseph Rotblat
science until demands that he adopt me that we would use any weapon we (the only Manhattan Project scientist
German citizenship led him to move had.” The movie shows the scientists to resign on conscientious grounds),
to the USA just after the outbreak of arguing that the bomb might end campaigned tirelessly against nuclear
World War 2, attested rather chillingly, the war if merely demonstrated to weapons, and he and the Pugwash
“In most scientific study, questions of the Japanese Government rather than organisation were jointly awarded
good and evil, or right or wrong, play used against Japan’s population, only the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize. Similarly,
Further reading
at most a minor and secondary part… to realise that the military had not the a decade earlier the International
Baggott J. Atomic: the first war
of physics and the secret history The true responsibility of a scientist, slightest interest in such a plan. While Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear
of the atom bomb 1939–49. as we all know, is to the integrity and hardly a key motivation for using War was awarded the 1985 Nobel
London: Icon Books, 2009 vigor of his science.” That seemed to be the bomb on civilians, it seemed the Peace Prize “for spreading authoritative
Ball P. Serving the Reich: the Heisenberg’s position too as he pursued US military was eager to harvest the information and by creating awareness
struggle for the soul of physics
under Hitler. London: Bodley
the research on uranium during the resulting insights about the medical of the catastrophic consequences of
Head, 2013 war while acting as an ambassador effects of mass irradiation. nuclear war”. Physicians and scientists
Bird K, Sherwin MJ. American of German science in the occupied The film also features Oppenheimer’s today do lobby for action on such issues
prometheus: the triumph and countries, leading to the famously audience with US President Harry S as climate change, environmental
tragedy of J. Robert
Oppenheimer. New York, NY:
contested meeting with Bohr in Truman (played by the increasingly degradation, and the risks of nuclear
Alfred A Knopf, 2005 Copenhagen in 1941. chameleonic Gary Oldman), who is war and advocate for ethical constraints
Haberer J. Politics and the The issue of the social responsibility contemptuous of the scientist’s display in areas such as biotechnology and
community of science. New of scientists is sometimes swept under of guilt about the Japanese bombings. artificial intelligence. But it remains
York, NY: Van Nostrand
Reinhold, 1969
the rug today, not with Oppenheimer’s After Oppenheimer says he feels he unclear if politicians, driven by their
Rhodes R. The making of the
vague and lofty rhetoric but by seeking has “blood on my hands”, Truman own agendas, pay them any more heed
atomic bomb. New York, NY: recourse in platitudes: for example, by is heard calling him a “cry-baby” as than Truman paid Oppenheimer. They
Simon & Schuster, 1986 echoing Winston Churchill’s alleged Oppenheimer is shown the door. have, it seems, still yet to speak the
Philip Ball’s forthcoming book view that “scientists should be on tap, The encounter mirrors the miserable same language.
How Life Works will be published
not on top”, while insisting that they experience of Bohr with Churchill when
by the University of Chicago Press
in November, 2023 and by also manage to “speak truth to power”. he suggested the British Prime Minister Philip Ball
Picador in January, 2024 The former UK Chief Scientific Adviser enter dialogue with the Soviet Union @philipcball

442 www.thelancet.com Vol 402 August 5, 2023