Morality Of Science Essay, Research Paper

There are two parallel stories in Mary Shelley?s Frankenstein, ?one of

attempting to discover the secret of life and the other of forcing nature to

open her secrets to man (Neal).? This novel can be looked by combining those

two stories into a theme of the scientist who seeks to play God and what happens

to him in his quest to create life from death. When looking at the book in this

regard, ?the reader discovers the dangers inherent in defying the natural

order, (Neal)? and the potential consequences of scientific discovery. Victor

Frankenstein, fascinated with scientific exploration in the physical world,

embarked upon an experiment that forever changed his life and that of his family

and friends. During his studies away from home, Victor foolishly decides that he

will play God. ?I will pioneer anew way, explore unknown powers, and unfold to

the world the deepest mysteries of creation (Shelly p. 47).? ?What lies

behind Frankenstein?s scientific projects is obviously an attempt to gain

power (Damyanov).? Victor devotes himself to his task of creating life from

death for a period of two years without once considering the implications of the

result of his experiment. ?Thoughtless Victor built in no safety controls, no

device to assure that only good actions would be performed (Neal).? ?Shelley

warns us of the dangerous division between the power-seeking practices of

science and the concerns of humanists with moral responsibility, emotional

communion, and spiritual values (Damyanov).? Victor invested so much selfish

care and time into his creation and never thought of the implications of his

success. As if almost seeing into the future, Shelly gives us a ?warning to

consider the final effects of scientific exploration and experiment (Neal).?

Neglecting all moral implications of his creation, Victor completes his work.

Victor never imagined that his success would create horror instead of joy and

immortality. ?It was a dreary night in November that I beheld the

accomplishment of my toils (Shelley p. 56).? ?How can I describe my emotions

at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains

and care I had endeavored to form (Shelley p. 56)?? Even when Victor came to

the realization that his success in creating his being had become an abhorrence,

he took no responsibility in trying to remedy his actions or take care of the

creature. ?Victor emulated God?s actions when he created the being

(Neal).? He had hoped ?a new species would bless me as its creator and

source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me (Shelly p.

52).? Unfortunately for Victor, the exact opposite resulted. Victor was

responsible to his creation as a father is to a child, but only tried to escape

the creature?s wretchedness. The creature has been left to his own devices to

either become part of society, or to live alone in hiding, suffering, and pain.

Victor awoke the day after witnessing his creature come to life in a horrifying

form and in finding the creature had disappeared, basically goes on with his

life. Frankenstein does not take on the moral responsibility of remedying his

disastrous creation until years later when it returned to him. Years after the

creatures ?birth,? he has learned to speak and write, and sets out in search

of Frankenstein; his creator, his father. He has discovered that no man will

treat him with any dignity or compassion or love and desires to find this from

his creator. After realizing that he cannot recover these feelings from

Frankenstein, the creature requests that Victor create another being; a female

form of himself, a true companion. When confronted by the creature, Victor seems

to realize for the first time the moral implications of what he has done.

?Wretched devil! You reproach me with your creation; con, then, that I may

extinguish the spark which I so negligently bestowed (Shelley p. 96).? The

creature, also realizing how wrong Frankenstein had been in his attempt to

become God, exclaims to him, ?How dare you sport thus with life? (Shelley

p.96)?? Victor eventually agrees to create a female companion for his

creature. While working on her creation, Victor becomes more acquainted with the

moral implications of his work and destroys the new companion. ?Might he not

conceive a greater abhorrence for it when it came before his eyes in the female

form? (Shelly p. 160)? When the creature discovers what Frankenstein has done

he swears vengeance and hatred to his creator and his family. Frankenstein, who

has become a terrible mess of an individual by this point, still tries to find

happiness, despite his creation, and also swears to rid the world of his

monster. ?Frankenstein has sought this unlimited power to the extent of taking

the place of God in relation to his creation (Damyanov)? and it has absolutely

ruined him. Frankenstein selfishly endeavored to play God without considering

that the result could likely have a negative impact on mankind. ?Shelley?s

message is clear; a morally irresponsible scientific development can release a

monster that can destroy human civilization itself (Damyanov).? Victor learns

this lesson, but too late. He has already lost his family, his best friend, his

wife and his livelihood. As he says while relating his tale, ?Learn from me,

if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement

of knowledge, and how much happier that man who believes his native town to be

the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow

(Shelly p.36).? Shelly?s moral lesson in her novel applies greatly to

science today with all the advances in technology and miraculous discoveries in

science, the implications of experiments and creations must be thoroughly

investigated. At the time the story was written, it would have been unimaginable

that these evens could hole any truth or possibility of reality. Now, the

possibilities are far too real and the implications could result in the end of

civilization, as it is now known.

Shelly, Mary. Frankenstein. Ed. Maurice Hindle. London: Penguin Group, 1992.

Damyanov, Orlin. ?Technology and it?s dangerous effects on nature and human

life as perceived in Mary Shelley?s Frankenstein and William Gibson?s

Neuromancer.? http://www.geocities.com/Paris/5972/gibson.html Neal, Patricia

A., Ph.D. ?Mary Shelley?s Frankenstein: Myth for Modern Man.? http://htserver.shc.edu/www/Scolar/neal/neal.html