8
$\begingroup$

In my story, back in around 3000BC , a secret organization was formed with the smartest of scientists and inventors. They developed technology many years ahead of their time. Every 'Invention' or 'Scientific Discovery' was in fact developed hundreds, if not thousands of years ago, and every inventor is a member of this society. However, nobody outside the group, not even governments know about this group, and all children will become a part of this group. Anybody showing misdeed will be executed.

But Why?

Why not give these discoveries to the public as soon as you get them?

$\endgroup$

closed as primarily opinion-based by Aify, bilbo_pingouin, Hohmannfan, Frostfyre, Green Sep 13 '16 at 12:30

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I find more interesting the how than the why of the described situation. $\endgroup$ – Theraot Sep 13 '16 at 7:17
  • $\begingroup$ I'm confused. If for the last 5k years "all children will become part of this group," then how is anyone outside the group? And if no one is outside the group, what "public" are you referring to? $\endgroup$ – Frostfyre Sep 13 '16 at 12:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Frostfyre i assume OP means children of the group become part of the group... but agree it needs clarification. $\endgroup$ – Trotski94 Sep 13 '16 at 12:19
9
$\begingroup$

Regarding why, in 3000 BC stepping forward could have been unhealthy for the scientists in question. King, priests, and peasants might have decided to burn the scientists for practicing witchcraft. Kings and priests might have forced the scientists to work for the existing power structure, with priorities imposed from the outside and unreasonable deadlines.

"You healed my advisor, now heal my wife. If you fail, your head will roll."

"Never mind crop rotation. Make gold."

And if that had been true at any one period in history, the scientists' cabal would have been forced underground. The pattern would reinforce itself. The cabal leaders believe that going public is a bad idea. The security officers gain more and more power. Newcomers are trained in secrecy and cell structures long before they are trained in science.

Of course I do not believe that this will work for millenia, or even centuries. Some of the children (and the children's children) will be unsuitable. Some will want to use technology to help people. Some will be careless. Some will want glory and worldly power for themselves, now.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In 3000 BC the people we call scientists were the priests. They were part of the existing power structure. Had a cabal of scientists existed, outside the elite, they would have lacked the resources to invent anything significant. It's doubtful if a scientific cabal could exist in any age. Scientists are notorious for believing in open communication. Secrecy is anathema to good science. $\endgroup$ – a4android Sep 13 '16 at 8:28
  • $\begingroup$ @a4android neither priests nor scientists are homogenous groups. This means there can very well eb a group among either who have different views (and, particularly for priests, might fear persecution) $\endgroup$ – Burki Sep 13 '16 at 10:11
  • $\begingroup$ @Burki That's true & it's another reason why a scientists' cabal would fail. Priests have the persecution business down pat. Heresies arise all the time. Trouble is heretics persist despite the persecution. Often they rise above it & become the new orthodoxy. In 3000 BC science in its infancy, it was also very different. Forming cabals wouldn't make sense. $\endgroup$ – a4android Sep 13 '16 at 10:43
4
$\begingroup$

Power.

Knowledge is power. More specifically knowing more than others is power. If your organization expects to have a certain level of power over society that translates directly into having a certain knowledge gap to the general public.

The real question is why they would be obsessed with having their power in the form of knowledge instead of leveraging knowledge to more direct forms of power such a military, political, and financial.

I am guessing they are the conservative belt, suspenders and healthy dose of glue type of people. They have lots of conventional power behind the scenes that they actually use, but rely on superior technology as the hidden trump card to guarantee their power.

This would naturally lead to mind set their the public would be allowed only the direct of technology that is at least two steps of development from being able to challenge the tech the organization has access to. You can compare this to the old British policy of the Royal Navy being stronger than the next two fleets combined.

This way even if they need to use their technology they can use tools that pose no direct threat even if a hypothetical enemy gets access to it because they still have superior tech available.

This kind of mind set would have implications to how the organization works and operates, but that is really beyond the scope of this question.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Because Einstein said so:
Our world faces a crisis as yet unperceived by those possessing power to make great decisions for good or evil. The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.

We learned to split the atom, potentially giving us limitless energy, and the first thing we do is build some bombs and destroy two cities.
According to this article, When Fritz Haber, the presiding genius of German chemical weaponry, was implored by his wife, herself a chemistry Ph.D., to give up his work on poison gas in World War 1, he replied that in peace a scientist serves mankind but in war he serves his country. His wife killed herself that night.

I'm governed (in South Africa) by a president who didn't even finish high school. Do you really want to give my president a technology he could use as a super weapon? So I think highly advanced 'fringe' science technologies would be hidden by a secret society for the simple purpose of preventing us from destroying ourselves.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Because they're an elite class that will someday develop space travel and escape from the hordes of Morlocks.

The guarantee of saving the cream of the species against a future apocalypse is probably worth the secrecy of technology, so self-preservation would be a valid reason, I think.

If you knew that there was a huge asteroid heading toward the planet and you didn't have access to Bruce Willis or Aerosmith, then you want to do something about it. It's reasonable to assume that you can't save everyone on the planet, but you would want to have the most capable people possible to ensure survival of the species.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @a4android Thanks for the edit, missed that. $\endgroup$ – Snow Sep 13 '16 at 8:24
  • $\begingroup$ Easy to do. A real word, so spell checkers will miss it. $\endgroup$ – a4android Sep 13 '16 at 8:29
2
$\begingroup$

This implies a slight modification of your premise. The members of the secret organization are time travelers. The technologies they develop centuries ahead of their due time are there because they visited the future and learnt about them. So, here's your answer: they must keep the inventions absolutely secret to avoid a paradox, the results of which, as you know, would cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Because they are peaceful people who fear that other people might try to misuse their inventions for selfish or evil purposes rather than for the good of mankind..

For example, a man who discovers how to make perfect clones would be worried about villainous organisations using it to clone themselves or the government using it to create an army of clones.

Someone who created an early version of the internet might fear that it would be used to spread messages of hate or used by armies to arrange fights instead of its intended uses as a means of communication and a repositry of knowledge accessible to all.


In addition, the organisation might choose to only accept other people who seek knowledge only for the love of knowledge, not for selfish means such as gaining fame, wealth or power.

They may also seek to some day develop the technology to leave the planet behind so they can start a new world with a utopian society that follows their ideology of pacifism, self sufficiency and science.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

As per my view sometimes its more dangerous to share an new invention of inventor with public.as we know both types of people live in this world..bad or good.we cant judge anybody.i just found this on Internet http://listverse.com/2009/07/19/10-useful-inventions-that-went-bad/ u can check it

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.