I think he did, or he would not have said the sentence I quoted. As a father of the atomic bomb, I would think that he thought about that topic a lot.

If I understood correctly his stance on the topic, science is neither good or bad.
Scientific investigation is what allows you to understand the universe (and in this particular context, mathematics is the language in which the laws of the world can be understood).

It is what you do with the technology that is derived from science that will he concerned with moral in the end. And this becomes quite complicated, as one cannot predict what will happen with technology. Did the atomic bomb help finish the war ? What if the Russians had it first ?



PS:
I don’t know what a “privileged” scientist is. To me, Feynman was someone that was a REALLY good scientist.
I think he would agree that his point of view should not be considered to be right because of that.
I think he would also agree that he might be wrong on this moral stuff, and would be ready to hear any arguments against his point of view.
However, after reading your article, I still tend to agree with him for now.