The double-edged sword of science is different from technology. The double-edged sword function of technology is innate or can be said to be "in the womb", while the double-edged sword function of science, especially the negative effect of science, is acquired, which is the product of science from spontaneous stage to conscious stage.

/kloc-since the rapid development of science and technology in the 0/7th century, it has not only fully demonstrated its beneficial functions, but also gradually exposed its harm to nature and society. This is one of the main reasons for the emergence of technological optimism, technological pessimism and anti-scientific thoughts in western society in the 1950s and 1960s. Now, the view that science and technology are a double-edged sword has been recognized by more and more people. However, firstly, most technology pessimists, such as Lao Tzu in China more than two thousand years ago and Rousseau in modern western countries, only think that technology will distort people's hearts and is not conducive to the "pure vulgarity" of society, but rarely consider the role of science and technology itself in the process of social and economic development. Second, people's understanding of this issue is basically in a state of "knowing why" and rarely asking "why". This is mainly because the understanding of this issue is limited to the level of perceptual experience, that is, through a large number of empirical facts to understand and put forward this issue, the lack of rational analysis of science and technology itself. Although Laozi's "a machine must have an organic mind" has a little rational logic, as mentioned above, it only shows the distortion of human nature by technology and does not find more negative effects of technology on society. Third, many people talk about the double-edged sword function of science and technology, that is, to bind science and technology indiscriminately and discuss it in general, but few people analyze their double-edged sword function alone. In this way, it is bound to reward and punish improperly, and even make science replace technology.

First of all, science belongs to cognitive activities and technology belongs to transformation activities. Knowledge activities take truth as the standard, and transformation activities take efficacy value as the standard. Secondly, as far as the original meaning of science is concerned, it has no practical purpose, while the purpose of technology is very practical. Science, as an activity, was originally just because people were amazed at the wonder of nature and had a conscious impulse to "want to know" or "want to know" and didn't want to change anything.

The greatest progress in the development of science is that science has stepped from the spontaneous stage to the conscious stage, that is, from "wanting to know" and "wanting to know" just out of curiosity to "should know" and "should know" for some practical purpose. Different from spontaneous science, conscious science also aims at practice. Therefore, the double-edged sword function of science has only objective significance in its spontaneous stage and lacks subjective intention. Only when science enters the conscious stage can it have practical and utilitarian purposes and increase the subjective double-edged sword function. But the technology is different. From the beginning, technology has a clear practical purpose, that is, to actively change the shape of objects for human survival and sustainable development. This difference between technology and science may be the reason why they went their own way in the first place. The history of science shows that science and technology were not closely combined at first, and the practical purpose of many scientific achievements could not be shown at that time or even for a long time. Many technologies do not happen under the guidance of science, but are accidental experiences and skills. The combination of science and technology is a historical process. This process can be said to be the luck of technology. Because technology gradually understands that the laws of scientific discovery can be used by it, can inspire it and become its theoretical basis, so that it can eliminate blindness and have a greater chance of success. At the same time, this process stimulates the scientific self-awareness, because the integration of scientific principles into technical activities greatly inspires and guides technical activities, and also realizes the function of transforming objects and serving mankind, so that the value of science indirectly enters the field of practice from the field of cognition and begins the process of self-awareness. But in any case, one thing is certain, that is, the practical purpose or function of science is indirect and realized through technology, and the role of science and technology in society is manifested through its achievements. Science aims at revealing the laws of objects, and its achievements are mostly conceptual forms, while technology aims at changing the existing forms of objects, and its achievements are mostly physical forms. Therefore, compared with scientific achievements, technological achievements have a much more direct effect on society. The double-edged sword of science is displayed through technological achievements.

Science is an activity that human beings explore objective laws. This definition not only contains the objectivity of law, but also shows that science is a human activity. Once human activities, especially creative thinking activities like science, are no longer spontaneous behaviors, just like technology, they also reflect human goals and have a strong subjective tendency. The objective law itself is value-neutral, which can not only benefit people, but also harm people, such as electricity, which can not only optimize people's lives, but also destroy them. When scientific activities have practical purposes, they not only have the function of using and developing or avoiding and weakening objective laws to benefit mankind, but also have the function of using and developing or avoiding or weakening objective laws to harm mankind. The goals of these two aspects are often the same in specific scientific activities. Because self-interest and harm to others are often the same process, and one party is the condition of the other. Even if it is only for the benefit of mankind, sometimes there will inevitably be side effects. For example, chemical fertilizers and pesticides are scientifically invented to benefit mankind, but they will pollute grain, vegetables, fruits and even feed, meat and eggs with certain toxins, which will endanger human health. Because the double-edged sword effect of science and technology is inevitable in an objective sense, scientific and technological activities can only try to avoid and suppress its negative effects, but can not completely eliminate them. The real problem is that human beings are divided into different interest groups, such as different classes, strata, groups, countries and nations. All interest groups are basically defending and fighting for their own interests, weakening and usurping each other's interests. Therefore, human history is full of such a phenomenon, that is, some interest groups sometimes deliberately use scientific and technological achievements to harm human beings to trade with each other, instructing or organizing scientists to make guns to kill people and drugs to poison people. The success of the invention of the atomic bomb is the result of this purpose.

At present, the voice of scientific ethics is very high, calling on governments and scientists of all countries to be responsible for the survival and sustainable development of mankind, to protect the environment, ecology and mankind while developing science and technology, to give full play to the function of science and technology to benefit mankind, and to resolutely overcome and stop scientific and technological achievements harmful to mankind. Although this is to arouse the moral sense of scientists, especially the government, history has proved that morality always gives way to interests, because interests are aimed at stakeholders themselves, while morality is always aimed at others. For example, if I ask a person to have morality, it means asking him to lower his own interests and take care of mine or others' interests. Only when this need to reduce his own interests is limited to "reducing" and does not harm his own interests, will he talk about morality. When "lowering" beyond a certain limit will harm his interests, he will not accept and exercise some morality imposed on him anyway, so ethics is weak in the face of interests.

Therefore, as long as mankind does not end the division of interest groups, the struggle will not stop. Science and technology, as the primary productive force, is bound to be universally valued by opposing interest groups, who will inevitably use the negative influence of science and technology to protect themselves, develop themselves and confront each other.

No matter what form of state system, contemporary countries have considerable political power and attach great importance to science and technology, which makes science and technology not only change from an activity form to a theoretical system form, but also become a state system. In this context, the development of science and technology has increasingly become a national behavior, and it is increasingly dependent on the state's funding and management, and the state is precisely the aggregation of different interest groups. Therefore, in the process of developing science and technology, every country will inevitably make full use of science, especially its negative effects on technology, and make some scientific and technological products that harm another part of people under various excuses. When every modern country deliberately uses the negative effects of science and technology to "develop" science and technology for specific reasons, science and technology will be alienated, from benefiting mankind to endangering mankind. Only when the world is harmonious and human beings no longer have conflicting interest groups can the negative effects of science be completely suppressed and the positive effects of science be fully mobilized and brought into play. However, the realization of this goal, even if possible, is very, very far away, even in the foreseeable future. Therefore, in the period when human beings continue to divide into different interest groups, I think that in order to exert the beneficial functions of science and restrain its harmful functions, we should not only strengthen the education of science, especially technical ethics, but also make efforts in the following two aspects: First, realize the transformation of scientific themes. In the past, the theme of science, whether out of curiosity about nature or out of purposeful consciousness, was to help technology determine what it could do in the direction of inspiring and guiding technology. Because technology has a double-edged sword function, the more science enlightens and guides technology, the more it will become an accomplice and pioneer of technology. Therefore, in the future scientific development, I think the theme of "what can be done" should be changed from guiding technology to "what can not be done" from normative technology, that is, from guiding technology to normative technology. Second, as an international coordinating organization, the United Nations should conform to the trend of globalization, formulate authoritative international conventions, and strictly examine and restrict scientific and technological achievements that may endanger human survival and sustainable development. Only in this way can the negative impact of science and technology on society be effectively controlled and become a weapon for the benefit of mankind.