Q.Science, like any knowledge, can be put to good or bad use, depending on the user. Given below are some of the applications of science. Formulate your views on whether the particular application is good, bad or something that cannot be so clearly categorised :

Science itself is value-neutral; it is the application, intent, and regulation of a technology that determines whether its effect on society is good, bad, or mixed. Evaluating each application:

• (a) Mass vaccination against smallpox — unambiguously good: it eradicated a disease that killed and disfigured millions, with no comparable downside; it is a landmark achievement of applied science for public good.
• (b) Television for eradicating illiteracy/mass communication — largely good in intent (education, spreading awareness, connecting society), but the same medium can spread misinformation, propaganda, or promote harmful values, so its net effect depends heavily on content and regulation.
• (c) Prenatal sex determination — the underlying technology (ultrasound/genetic testing) is medically legitimate for detecting health conditions, but in practice, in a society with strong son-preference, it has been widely misused to selectively abort female fetuses, contributing to skewed sex ratios. This is why India's PCPNDT Act bans disclosing fetal sex for non-medical reasons — a case where the application itself is restricted despite legitimate underlying diagnostic value.
• (d) Computers for work efficiency — good: computers dramatically increase productivity and enable capabilities (data analysis, communication, design) that were previously impossible; the main downside (job displacement in some sectors) is a social/economic consequence to be managed, not an argument against the technology itself.
• (e) Artificial satellites — good: they enable weather forecasting, telecommunications, navigation (GPS), disaster monitoring, and scientific research; the same technology can also be used for military reconnaissance, illustrating dual-use potential.
• (f) Development of nuclear weapons — bad: unlike nuclear power (which has civilian benefit), nuclear weapons exist specifically for mass destruction, with catastrophic and long-lasting humanitarian and environmental consequences, as seen in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
• (g) Chemical and biological warfare techniques — bad: like nuclear weapons, these are designed for indiscriminate harm to human life and are banned under international conventions (Chemical Weapons Convention, Biological Weapons Convention) precisely because their humanitarian cost is judged unacceptable.
• (h) Purification of water for drinking — unambiguously good: safe drinking water prevents diseases like cholera and typhoid and is one of the most life-saving applications of applied science and engineering. …

For each application (a)-(j), judge it against its net effect on human welfare, distinguishing the technology's civilian/beneficial use from any parallel harmful use, and note where regulatio …

• Declaring every item either 'all good' or 'all bad' without recognising genuinely dual-use technologies (television, computers, satellites, cloning, plastic surgery).
• Missing the real-world Indian context for (c) — the PCPNDT Act exists precisely because of documented misuse for sex-selective abortion. …