Hitler and Humanity

OK, So I wrote this way back in 2002, but I just came across it (looking for a writing sample for grad. school, and I think it is interesting.)

After reading Hawking’s article, “A Brief History of Relativity” it is not surprising that in a society like ours, Time Magazine would choose Einstien as “Person of the Century.”  The choice of a scientist as person of the century is logical, especially for Americans.  The American society is so heavily dependent on technology and technological advances that the choice of a man who revolutionized the science world with his theory of relativity was chosen as the person of the century, as science is the background of all technology.  But I think the “person of the century” should have been someone that had an effect on our perception of humanity.  Someone who taught us the infinite worth and value of the human person, which at first glance would point to Pope John Paul II, but that is not exactly what I had in mind, although he too would make a wonderful choice, but I believe the one man who truly showed the world the value of humanity would be Hitler.  I recall when they were choosing the person of the century, Hitler was highly considered, not because what he did was good, but its effect taught the world a valuable lesson about humanity.  The holocaust was an awful thing, but the genocide made many people realize that there is value in life, all human life.  I think that the choice of the person of the century should have had more of a focus on the uplifting of humanity.  Science is fine, but it does very little to establish worth and value in humanity, if anything science suppresses humanity.  Hawking tells us, that with his new theory, “Einstein had overthrown two of the Absolutes . . . Did this imply, people asked, that there were no absolute moral standards, that everything was relative?”  This is a huge detriment to an already fragile humanity, to put doubt in the minds of people living in a morally corrupt society that there is an absolute morality, only leads to the down fall of man.  It is precisely this quote, which makes me doubt the choice of Einstein as person of the century.  I am not denying that he was a brilliant man, and he is deserving of much praise, but to be chosen as person of the century I am not to sure about.  I was surprised to learn that is was not Einstein who built the Atomic bomb; I had always been taught it he had designed the atomic bomb.  I admire that “He urged the Allies to set up a world government to control the atom bomb,” this does show concern for humanity I do not deny that, but the majority of Einstein’s work did not have anything to do with the improvement of humanity.  I agree with Hawking “The world has changed far more in the past 100 years than in any other century in history.  The reason is not political or economic, but technological—technologies that flowed directly from advances in basic science.  .  .  .  No scientist better represents those advances than Albert Einstein.”  While I think Einstein was a nice choice for person of the century, and I can see why he was chosen.  I feel that the person of the century should have been someone who taught us something about humanity.  Because it is not just the world that has changed in the past hundred years, but man has changed in the past hundred years, and technology and science effect man and humanity, and I believe that humanity is far more important than any scientific or technological advance.

ETA: I did have a link to the Hawking article in my paper, but of course it is no longer active.