Sunteți pe pagina 1din 4

Insert surname

Name
Affiliation
Date
Ethics and Science in Mary Shelleys Frankenstein
Ethics and science have created a debate in the society with the religion disagreeing with
any scientific research that is destructive and morally corruptive. Mary Shelleys Frankenstein
also addresses the same issue and uses a destructive experiment in human physiology to prove
how science can be unethical. More specifically, the novel presents Victor Frankenstein, who is
an arrogant scientist that is focused on achieving what he wants regardless of the overall
outcome. In fact, he creates a monster that ends up killing his family members and friends too.
He ends up living a stressful life since he wonders how he will correct the mistakes that he had
already created earlier. Mary Shelley cautions the society against ignoring ethics during the
scientific advancement, and she provides evidence to support that. She proves that some research
might have a potential to destroy and morally corrupt the society instead. Shelley also believes
that human brilliance should be fused with ethics to protect the society from any harm.
Frankensteins creation is one of the manifestations of scientific advancement that lacks the
ethics that guides the society. Mary Shelleys Frankenstein illustrate that ethics is one of the
elements that will act as a limit of the scientific inquiry in the society and proves that through the
inability of Frankenstein to control the monster after he had created it.
Mary Shelley shows how Frankenstein was blinded by his ambitions and never
considered the safety of the society. Frankenstein showed how irresponsible he was, and he never
consulted anyone or even considered the morality of the act. He even reveals that so much has
been done, far more will I achieve: treading in the steps already marked, I will pioneer a new

Insert surname

way, explore unknown powers, and unfold to the world the deepest mysteries of creation
(Shelley, p. 49). Clearly, he was focused on his ambitions and creating something extraordinary;
but, he never considered the morality of the research. Apart from that, anyone that advised him
against proceeding with the research was considered as an enemy. For instance, Frankenstein
insists that the professors words enounced to destroy me my soul was gripped by a palpable
enemy (Shelley, p. 49). Indeed, his ambitions had blinded him from the morality that should be
considered before undertaking such research. In the process, he failed to consider the limit of
scientific inquiry since he wanted to prove the professor and the society wrong. To some extent,
he wanted to achieve a divine status, which is totally unethical. In fact, such a decision is in
contrast to the way the society works since God is the only one with the ability to create beings.
Instead, he creates the monster, and he fails to nurture it into being a responsible creature
(Hogsette, 542). All in all, Mary Shelley is trying to prove that ethical science is the appropriate
way to achieve the required advancement. Clearly, unethical science has shown that a scientist
can work on ideas that will even destroy the society if they are not controlled. Hence, the ethics
will be one of the things that will act as a limit to scientific inquiry, and prioritize the safety of
the society.
Frankenstein insists on the dangers of separating science and the society since it amounts
to the scientists lacking ethics that everyone should possess. The novel illustrates how
Frankenstein preferred staying alone and away from the society in the name of intensive
research. More specifically, Frankenstein believed like the society was a distraction from his
research and staying alone was the only way to achieve the perfection he wants. He even insists
that natural philosophy became nearly my sole occupation (Shelley, p. 51) and that took
him away from his family and the entire society. In the process, he developed an inhumane

Insert surname

personality, and he could not understand what human nature entails. For instance, he believed
that human nature was about creation and development; but, he forgot about socialization that
instills morals in a creature. The lack of compassion and morals led to the death of his brother
William and his friend Henry. Instead, being closer to the society and his family would have
given Frankenstein a chance to understand the socialization and what human nature entails
(Burkett, 586). Instead, he could have restrained from creating a creature that lacks a soul and
ended up being a murderer. Mary Shelley was vouching for morality since it asserts on the
importance of life and the need to obey nature as well. However, Frankenstein believed that he
had the ability to reanimate other creatures and still nurture them into being responsible people in
the society. He forgot that morality is an important part of creation and people are supposed to
abide by such guidelines. His entire research did not consider the safety and the wellbeing of the
society since he did not contemplate the dangers of the monster staying in the society (Cameron,
184). In fact, he destroys the second monster that was supposed to be a partner of the first
monster. In this case, he had seen the danger associated with the creatures and he was unwilling
to create another one.
In conclusion, Mary Shelley proves that ethics is one of the elements that will restrict
scientific advancement in the society. Frankensteins arrogance blinded him from the ethics, and
he was only focused on achieving the unreasonable ambitions he had. Such ambitions pushed
him into creating monsters that turned out to be destructive. Besides that, he even failed to
control the same monsters, and he ended up being stressed since it creates more harm than he had
expected. Apart from that, the fact that he had stayed away from the society also turned him into
being have an inhumane personality that also resulted in the creation of the monster. All in all, it
is clear that ethics will be important in controlling scientific advancement.

Insert surname
Works Cited
Burkett, Andrew. "Mediating Monstrosity: Media, Information, and Mary Shelley's"
Frankenstein"." Studies in Romanticism 51.4 (2012): 579-605.
Cameron, Lauren. "Mary Shelley's Malthusian Objections in The Last Man." NINETEEN CENT
LIT 67.2 (2012): 177-203.
Hogsette, David S. "Metaphysical intersections in Frankenstein: Mary Shelley's theistic
investigation of scientific materialism and transgressive autonomy." Christianity &
Literature 60.4 (2011): 531-559.
Shelley M. Frankenstein. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics, 1816.

S-ar putea să vă placă și