The author in question uses the scenario in question 4 of the wonderful advances in knowledge and technology and the great things those advances have brought forth, he then goes on to use the great wars of the 20th century as the evil side of those advances. I believe there is a problem with the reasoning in that scenario and it ascribing morality to amoral ideas or things. It is the age old question, do guns kill people or do people kill people? The energy contained within an atom when released can provide relatively safe and cheap energy for our use or it can destroy on unimaginable scale. The morality exists in the choice of how to use it. It was not the wonderful advances that made great advancements but lofty ideas and creative minds, conversely it was not wicked advances that caused the great wars but creatively deprived minds that sought advances in the destructive force.