Use Of Poison Gas Research Articles

Cross-Cultural Differences in the Structure of Moral Values: A Factorial Analysis

The relatively high similarity in the factorial structure of the Middle Eastern and American moral values in Factors A and C support the view that the moral judgments of college students of the two cultures studied here are not very dissimilar. In fact, these two factors account for approximately 66 per cent and 55 per cent, respectively, of the explained item variance in each sample. It is worth noting, however, that the bipolar Factor C (family morality) has high negative loadings in the Middle Eastern group, whereas among American students, the high loading items are positive. It seems, therefore, that the Middle Eastern Factor C specifies the more general and broad functions of the family rather than the primary functions of this dimension. For example, divorce (item 33), use of birth control (item 32), girls smoking (item 6), a man not marrying a girl inferior to him (item 50), and a doctor allowing a deformed baby to die when he could save its life (item 8), are issues specifically related to practices of the American family which are emphasized by Middle Eastern students as general concerns of the family. The structure of Factor B (economic morality) does not differ greatly in the two samples. Apparently in both transitional and industrial societies, the identification of a separate economic code of morality is at least moderately similar. Nevertheless, a few differences can be noticed. For example, the high positive loadings in the Middle Eastern group on items 6 (girls smoking), 11 (betting on horse races), and 35 (living on inherited wealth) do not seem to be meaningful in the economic sense among American students; instead, these items are subsumed under Factors E and C. On the other hand, the high positive loadings that occur in the American group on items 5 (breaking promises), 12 (dealing unjustly with a weaker nation), and 29 (charging interest above a fair rate) suggest social welfare and religious sources (Factors F and D) for Middle Eastern students. Perhaps these slight differences explain, in part, why this dimension is only moderately invariant in structure. The invariance coefficient in Factor F (social welfare) is equally moderate. Despite the similarity in structure, it appears that the issues are interpreted slightly differently in the two cultures. The high loading items in the Middle Eastern group have negative or zero loadings in the American group and vice versa. For example, killing a person in self-defense (item 1), kidnapping (item 2), failing to keep promises (item 5), a nation dealing unjustly with a weaker nation (item 12), a man deserting a girl (item 48), a man not marrying a girl inferior to him (item 50), are condemned actions in the Middle Eastern group, whereas American students judge such issues as either not pertinent or accepted moral codes. On the other hand, living beyond one's means (item 14), using profane speech (item 37), being disagreeable to members of the family (item 38), misrepresenting value of an investment (item 42), are emphasized by American students and are less important for those from the Middle East. The differences in emphasis on issues relating to the same dimension support the notion that cultures are different in degree rather than in kind. The religious factor (D) occupies a more prominent position among Middle Easterners than among American students. In the former group, the religious factor encompasses moral judgments pertaining to adultry (item 16), charity (item 20), disbelief in God (item 49), charging interest above a fair rate (item 29), use of poison gas (item 46), forging (4), and working conditions detrimental to worker's health (item 7), while for American students some of the same issues are of a low priority and a few others are assumed under separate dimensions. In part, the obtained low invariance in the structure of Factor D may be primarily the result of a strict religious moral system known to characterize the Middle Eastern society. In contrast, the continued growth of technology, urbanization, military power and economic progress in the American society, are likely to weaken religious morality. Moreover, the individual in the American society finds himself free of restrictions due to certain unique elements of his society, such as its recruitment from Europe and its lack of any feudal past which carry with it the implications of tradition and authority-a historical antecedent for the Middle East.1 The most striking difference in the factorial structure of both cultural groups becomes apparent in Factor E which delineates anti-exploitive issues in the Middle Eastern group and which is not exceeded in prominence by other dimensional issues. The same moral codes are not highly condemned by

The Medical Profession and Chemical Warfare

WE are glad that the British Medical Association, during the session held at Oxford on July 17-25, gave consideration, at the annual representative assembly on July 17, to the subject of chemical warfare. The Council of the Association reported that the question of the protection of the community against the effects of poison gas is being examined in connexion with the Air Raid Precautions Department of the Home Office before any definite proposals are made. After discussion of a resolution submitted by the North Glamorgan and Brecon Division of the Association, the following amendment was adopted: “That this meeting condemns unreservedly the use of poison gas in warfare as inhuman in its results and degrading to civilization, and relies upon the council to do everything in its power with a view to securing the co-operation of the medical profession in all countries in order to prohibit the use of poison gas.” In the course of the discussion, an appeal was made to men of science generally, as well as to members of the medical profession, to protest collectively against the destruction of civilian populations through the use of poison gas, and to try to secure international co-operation with this end in view. Even though politicians may consider it impracticable to do anything to prohibit the destruction of human life by indiscriminate chemical warfare, yet scientific workers should let the community know that they dissociate themselves from the use of such methods. We hope therefore, that at the forthcoming meeting of the British Association at Blackpool the lead given by the British Medical Association will be followed; so that science may not be understood by silence as acquiescing in the application of its discoveries to the degradation of civilized life.

Chemical Warfare and Disarmament

ADDRESSING the House of Commons on May 13 on disarmament, Sir John Simon, Secretary for Foreign Affairs, said that everyone would agree it was desirable to enter into an agreement, and make effective its observance, against the use of poison gas in warfare. It was an example of ‘qualitative’ disarmament, contrasted with ‘quantitative’ disarmament, aiming at a limitation of the number and size of ships and the calibre of guns. Sir John Simon's declaration was received| with cheers, and his argument was reinforced in the debate by Mr. Winston Churchill, who laid stress on the indiscriminate character of gas warfare, entailing death and wounds not merely to combatants but also to the civil population, men, women, and children, far removed from the area of hostilities. He pointed out that the acceptance among the leading authorities of different countries of the bombing of open towns would introduce a new idea into warfare, “an idea not compatible with any civilised decency”. Are we to allow ourselves to be led, step by step, into contemplating such hideous episodes as part of the ordinary give and take of war?

Will Civilisation Crash?

IN this volume by Commander Kenworthy we are reminded of the homicidal tendencies of the constituent parts of the white race, the aggregate effect of which, if unrestrained, must be race suicide and the end of the present phase of civilisation. During the War, latent resources, inherent in civilised man's growing dominion over natural forces, were only partly mobilised in the attempt at self-annihilation. Even so, the rapid development of the mechanical side of war, the enhanced efficiency of the aeroplane as a destructive agent, the invention of land ironclads, the almost incredible increase in the range, accuracy, and mobility of the guns of the heavy artillery, and the use of poison gas, liberated from cylinders or projectiles, had given the armies in the field and civilian populations a foretaste of horrors to come, sufficient, it might be thought, to have created a common will for the outlawry of ordeal by battle. Will Civilisation Crash? By Lt.-Comdr. the Hon. J. M. Kenworthy. With an Introduction by H. G. Wells. Pp. 320. (London: Ernest Benn, Ltd., 1927.) 10s. 6d. net.

"POISON GAS FOR MOSQUITOES"

To the Editor: —My attention has been directed to a communication by Dr. Hulussi Mustafa of Diabekir, Turkey (The Journal, September 4, p. 777), in which apparently he claims to be the first to introduce the use of poison gas for the destruction of mosquitoes. Permit me, as president of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, to direct attention to a paper by a fellow of that society, Mr. K. B. Williamson, which was published in the society'sTransactions(17:485, 1924). It is entitled The Use of Gases and Vapors for Killing Mosquitoes Breeding in Wells and is an account of the work he carried out on this subject during the war. He tested a number of different gases, including chloropicrine and chlorine, and gives a full and illustrated account of his research work. Dr. Mustafa has not yet published details of his method, and it is

Arms, Tactics and Strategy in the Persian War

At all times arms, tactics and strategy must be in one sense or another interdependent. But in modern warfare I imagine it would be generally agreed that strategy was less mutable and more important than tactics or armament. Even here there are obvious and notable exceptions to the general rule. In the Austro-Prussian War, it was the superiority of the Prussian breech-loading needle-gun to the Austrian muzzle-loader which won the battle of Königgratz, and so justified the bold strategy of Moltke. In the late war, the heavy German and Austrian howitzers broke down with unexpected rapidity the resistance of the elaborate Belgian fortresses, and thus compelled the retreat from Mons; again, the use of tanks, both heavy and light, on a large scale was a decisive factor in more than one of the great struggles that led up to the final defeat of the Germans. Nevertheless in modern warfare such differences are in the main temporary and accidental; if, for instance, the Germans began the war with superior heavy artillery, before its close they were surpassed by the Allies; if they secured an initial advantage by the use of poison gas, here too the Allies in the end showed themselves superior to the inventors of this deadly instrument of war. The advantage gained by inventors is mainly that of surprise, and is therefore evanescent, not permanent. In the main the fleets and armies on either side are equipped in the same way, and (if we leave out of account the morale, numbers and resources of the nations engaged) victories are gained and wars decided most of all by strategy, the massing of troops at the right time and place, and secondarily by tactics, the best use of them in actual battle.

The Use of Poison Gas

The Use of Poison Gas

The Organisation of Research in Agriculture

Of the results of the war, not the least remarkable is the awakening of interest in the application of scientific research to economic ob jects and the readiness of the State to endow industrial investigations of all kinds; and yet the admitted pre-eminence of Germany in the techni cal applications of scientific knowledge does not jump to the eyes in the apparatus or operations of war. She cannot even claim priority in her in humanities. The use of poison-gas was suggested to our War Office soon after the Crimean War and unhesitatingly rejected. Nor has the extraordin arily lavish expenditure of Germany on abstract, as well as industrial, research been productive of very marked new additions to knowledge. The root of the matter must be sought elsewhere. In a paper read by M. Georges Wery at a conference held in Paris last June and presided over by the Minister of Agriculture, one finds attention directed to what is really the dominant character istic of the German people in relation to this mat ter-a characteristic to which much of their recent advance in efficiency may be ascribed.

The Use of Poisonous Gases in War

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.