Over thousands of years, creating life is a divine power of God, giving people the right to be born and live. However, many scientists have attempted to play the role of God for the pursuit of knowledge in the scientific world by cloning or in-vitro fertilization, stirring up many encounters of moral dilemmas and ethical debates. In the book Frankenstein, Mary Shelley has captured this controversial concern by portraying Doctor Frankenstein’s enthusiasm of chasing the dangerous knowledge, which becomes a heated discussion of morality for readers and evaluators. Although Frankenstein is established 1818, Mary Shelley’s concerns about scientific progress are still relevant to the modern day of the scientific world. Frankenstein’s quest for scientific …show more content…
In contrast, the idea of in-vitro fertilization is also about creating life, but this modern-day parallel is more beneficial to humanity. With the growth of our modern society, scientists have found the way to help people who can't have babies due to fertility issues or same-sex couples: in-vitro fertilization, also called test-tube conception, medical procedure in which mature egg cells are removed from a woman, fertilized with male sperm outside the body, and inserted into the uterus of the same or another woman for normal gestation. (Britannica). The benefit of in-vitro fertilization to women those have the disability is utterly priceless. Not only bring to women the right to give birth, many single mothers can also have babies of their own with the help of sperm donors, resulting wanted babies without the genetic diseases or handicap. However, many Christians oppose the concept of in-vitro fertilization acidly, because they prefer the natural ways which God has given to mankind in the very beginning. Since God is the only one who has the divine power to create life, some people go against that scientific method and criticize scientists as they have been imitating God’s action. Frankly, God has given the knowledge of using
Frankenstein has been interested in natural science since childhood and has described himself to “always have been imbued with a fervent longing to penetrate the secrets of nature”(Shelley 25), which foreshadows his future aspiration to create life, and
Works Cited Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 1818. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. Norton Critical Edition. New York: Norton, 1996.
New medications are discovered daily. However, had Mary Shelly's proposition of "playing god" been a reality in the late 18th century, and had Victor Frankenstein been able to take this dramatic shortcut in the slow process of evolution by creating life from death, the crisis between the church and science would have been decidedly against science. Such were the sentiments of Victor's headmaster at Ingolstadt, as well as the rest of the European scientific community. Frankenstein's intentions were good. He had wanted to rid the world of genetic defects and bacterial disease by creating the perfect man. He would do so by applying electricity to the polar regions of a body, which he had constructed from pieces of freshly executed villains, while submerging them in an elemental pool of life. However, he was so driven towards his goal that he never considered the consequences of his actions. He was in many ways acting like the benefactor of Jurassic Park, hastily creating a life form without consideration of possible detriments. When Frankenstein had created his monster, he didn't know what to do with it and immediately wished it dead, but ironically he had made it so strong that it would not die.
When the novel “Frankenstein”, by Mary Shelley came out in 1831 the general public was introduced to the idea of man creating another man, scientifically without the use of reproduction. The disasters that followed, in the novel, demonstrated the horrid fact that creating humans was not natural. That was in 1831, when the knowledge of science had not yet evolved enough to act on such an idea. Now as the start of a new millenium approaches, having the capability to scientifically produce one human who is genetically identical to another, or cloning a human, has a lot of people questioning weather or not it is our moral right to do such a thing. It is a classic debate between principles of science and principles of religion.
In this novel, Shelley focuses on the debate between scientific discoveries, religion and the moral ethics of how far man should pursue his desire for knowledge, which reflects the society of the 19th century’s concern of where the scientific advancements were going similarly to the present day debate on whether stem cell research is valid.
Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” is more than just a regular novel. It is a book that conveys a deep philosophical message. The novel moved me to my very soul. It turned out to be a book not about an encounter against a monster but a misfortune of a scientist, who reached the goal of his work and life and realized that breathless horror and disgust filled his heart but all of these is on the surface. The inmost philosophical thought is covered and hidden, but is very profound. The author tries to say that life is a gift. After this gift is given no one can take it away and it transforms the accountability of the creator. The novel makes the reader anxious with the question: “Is a human being able to take obligation to provide life?”
The popular 1931 version of Frankenstein, based on Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, depicts an anti-exploration and anti-intellectual philosophy. In Frankenstein there are criticisms for the immoral behavior that is involved with progress, the natural tendency for humanity to attempt to be greater than God and the pursuit of knowledge. Frankenstein, the doctor, aims to create a man in his own image. His personal ambitions drove him mad and into isolation. He leaves school in pursuit of better facilities and free rein to test, create and revise.
Over two centuries ago, Mary Shelley created a gruesome tale of the horrific ramifications that result when man over steps his bounds and manipulates nature. In her classic tale, Frankenstein, Shelley weaves together the terrifying implications of a young scientist playing God and creating life, only to be haunted for the duration of his life by the monster of his own sordid creation. Reading Shelley in the context of present technologically advanced times, her tale of monstrous creation provides a very gruesome caution. For today, it is not merely a human being the sciences are lusting blindly to bring to life, as was the deranged quest of Victor Frankenstein, but rather to generate something potentially even more dangerous and horrifying with implications that could endanger the entire world and human population.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus, explores the monstrous and destructive affects of obsession, guilt, fate, and man’s attempt to control nature. Victor Frankenstein, the novel’s protagonist and antihero, attempts to transcend the barriers of scientific knowledge and application in creating a life. His determination in bringing to life a dead body consequently renders him ill, both mentally and physically. His endeavors alone consume all his time and effort until he becomes fixated on his success. The reason for his success is perhaps to be considered the greatest scientist ever known, but in his obsessive toil, he loses sight of the ethical motivation of science. His production would ultimately grieve him throughout his life, and the consequences of his undertaking would prove disastrous and deadly. Frankenstein illustrates the creation of a monster both literally and figuratively, and sheds light on the dangers of man’s desire to play God.
In today’s world of genetically engineered hearts and genetically altered glowing rats, the story of Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, seems as if it could be seen in the newspapers in our near future. The discoveries seen in modern science, as well as in the novel, often have controversy and negative consequences that follow them, the biggest of which being the responsibility the creator of life has to what has been created. Victor Frankenstein suffers from a variety of internal and external conflicts stemming from the creation of his monster, which in return also experiences similar problems. Shelley uses these tumultuous issues to portray the discrepancies between right and wrong, particularly through romanticism and the knowledge of science.
Mary Shelley expresses various ethical issues by creating a mythical monster called Frankenstein. There is some controversy on how Mary Shelley defines human nature in the novel, there are many features of the way humans react in situations. Shelley uses a relationship between morality and science, she brings the two subjects together when writing Frankenstein, and she shows the amount of controversy with the advancement of science. There are said to be some limits to the scientific inquiry that could have restrained the quantity of scientific implications that Mary Shelley was able to make, along with the types of scientific restraints. Mary Shelley wrote this classic novel in such a way that it depicted some amounts foreshadowing of the world today. This paper will concentrate on the definition of human nature, the controversy of morality and science, the limits to scientific inquiry and how this novel ties in with today’s world.
Frankenstein is a young scientist who is blinded by the fame and dangers of the knowledge of creation. "So much has been done," exclaims Frankenstein after he hears a lecture on famous scientists. "More, far more, will I achieve: treading in the steps already marked, I will pioneer a new way, explore unk...
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a nineteenth century literary work that delves into the world of science and the plausible outcomes of morally insensitive technological research. Although the novel brings to the forefront several issues about knowledge and sublime nature, the novel mostly explores the psychological and physical journey of two complex characters. While each character exhibits several interesting traits that range from passive and contemplative to rash and impulsive, their most attractive quality is their monstrosity. Their monstrosities, however, differ in the way each of the character’s act and respond to their environment. Throughout Frankenstein, one assumes that Frankenstein’s creation is the true monster. While the creation’s actions are indeed monstrous, one must also realize that his creator, Victor Frankenstein is also a villain. His inconsiderate and selfish acts as well as his passion for science result in the death of his friend and family members and ultimately in his own demise.
Since the beginning of time man has been infatuated with the idea of pushing the human body to its limits by the use of science. The Space program is the best example of science helping humans accomplish things never before thought possible. In the age of technology and scientific advancement ideas that once seemed like science fiction, for example people walking on the moon, are now a reality. In order to push human development, ethics and morals have been pushed to the side. Necessary evils have been accepted as part of science without a second thought. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein a scientist, Victor Frankenstein, plays God by creating a monster out of body parts and bringing it to life. When Frankenstein realizes the full extent to what he’s done, he abandons the monster leaving it confused and lonely. The monster then
Frankenstein, in his Faustian quest for knowledge, comes to symbolise ‘the man of science’ within the text. His family background and social position places him as a man of the enlightenment. It is therefore arguable that Frankenstein represents the empirical strand of Enlightenment science and thus his quest for knowledge symbolises a large push for scientific knowledge in the 19th century. However, Shelly portrays Frankenstein’s project as defiling nature. This is seen in Frankenstein’s assemblage of the creature.