Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
In Frankenstein one of the questions I face is whether Frankenstein is trying to create
life or bring life back, and if there is even a difference? There is a difference between the two.
An example for bringing life back is resuscitation. Most people find comfort to know that there
is a way to make a heart beat again if it were to suddenly stop, that if someone were to die
there is a possibility of their survival. What does it matter whether a person is revived a minute
after they die or a day? But to create a completely new life from gathering body parts and
putting them together, that is not resuscitation. People’s lives can change from a near death
experience but most would agree that they are still the same person with the same “soul”. In
the book I think it is clear that Frankenstein has tried to create life and not just bring it back, the
death of his mother puts the idea of immortality in his head but the fact that Frankenstein’s
own teachers begin shooting his ideas down, may have pushed him over the edge to prove he
good do something no one thought was possible “that I might infuse a spark of being into the
lifeless thing that lay at my feet.” (Chapter 5) “I had worked hard for nearly two years, for the
sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body.” (Chapter 5)
Is creating life possible? Is creating life morally right? After reading Frankenstein a
person must have these questions in their mind. At the time the book was written the answer
for whether it was possible would have simply been a no. This is proven by Frankenstein’s own
professors. "Have you," he said, "really spent your time in studying such nonsense?” said M.
Krempe (Chapter 3). His teachers say to put the books of alchemy away and start reading the
scientists of the time. For the professors the idea of creating life is a thing of magic and myth.
“continued M. Krempe with warmth, "every instant that you have wasted on those books is
utterly and entirely lost. You have burdened your memory with exploded systems and useless
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
names… In what desert land have you lived, where no one was kind enough to inform you that
these fancies… are a thousand years old and as musty as they are ancient?” (Chapter 3) Mr.
Krempe later gives Frankenstein names of the authors he should be reading. This means that
for everyone else, creating life cannot be possible. Frankenstein shows them they are wrong by
creating the creature.
In today’s advancements in medicine and technology there is a bigger chance that
creating life is possible, but are these advancements of the human ability capable of such a
massive and controversial feat. Creating life is usually left to God, nature, or even the Universe
as the one, or thing that holds the power to create and control life. Creating life and testing the
human DNA could have great benefits. Seeing that the human race is at most times corrupt and
greedy. 80% of humanity lives on only $10 a day while the overly wealthy 1% has more money
than the whole population combined. One of the most ancient and respected congregations,
the Catholic Church, is being accused of molestation of young children. These extremes of
today’s world show that humanity is not perfect. How can people hope to create something
that is perfect if humanity doesn’t even know what it is to be so? I am almost certain we
couldn’t just leave the chance of a perfect being alone. The thought would gnaw away at our
brains and eventually convince us that because we have the power to make humans better, we
should. The human race should not make a perfect being and we should not be creating life.
Who are we to go messing around with things we barely know about? But is it even possible?
In the world of Technology I believe the answer is yes. Eventually there will be robots so
advanced they will not need a human hand. They will be able to fix and think for themselves.
They’re intelligence will be greater than a humans and they will be able to do things we cannot
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
do. Robots are already in today’s world, in manufacturing, in surgery, and in discovery. The
Mars rover has made some discoveries already in a place mankind may never survive. Just
because a robot doesn’t breath and eat may not mean they do not have life, it is possible that
eventually a robot will be able to actually think, dream, and have feelings. At that point the
robot has life.
Technology can actually help society. When a person loses limbs a robotic attachment
could enhance their way of living, even though this way could be hard to get use to, many
people would agree that they would choose a robotic arm over no arm. Studies of prosthetics
are going on right now in the school of Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The lead
professor Hugh Herr said he wants to make prosthetics better than the real thing. They are
making a prosthetics with smart enough technology, so that the human brain may be able to
control it and they believe it will be possible in the next 5-10 years. Including microchips and
computers into the robot category, humanity could be cured of mental illness; brain damage
won’t be so devastating. And robotic organs, these ideas have already been looked into. If a
person gets into an accident and a lung collapses they have machines that can keep a person
breathing (iron lung). It is incredible how technology has grown to help mankind. It may be hard
to believe that there are any disadvantages to robotics.
Of course robots taking over the human race will come into play. A disadvantage to
making robots at this day in age is the robots taking over our jobs in the work force. You no
longer need a cashier you can become your own. In car factories most is done with machines
and little done with humans. Machines building, machines. Still at this point the machines only
have a “brain” capacity of what they are supposed to be doing, finding prices or welding. But try
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
to think of the future when people want robots for maids, one flat rate not an everyday price.
The “brain” capacity grows larger and larger every time the robot gets a new job. It is possible
for a robot at some point to gain so much knowledge that they want to turn against humans
and begin their own race.
In the world of medicine the answer for me I thought was no, when one of the most life
threatening diseases is cancer, when a person can get a large amount of brain damage and
can’t be brought back from a vegetable state. At this point medicine can’t even keep people
who are already alive, alive. There are no cures for life threatening illnesses how can you hope
to create life, cloning. Scientists have already cloned a sheep named Dolly in 1997, why not
humans? There are two different types of cloning, one mimics the way a clone is naturally
made in nature (twins) it is called Artificial Embryo Twinning. The second type of cloning is
called Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, it is when a scientist takes any cell in the body excluding
the reproductive cells which are called germ cells and duplicate the two complete sets of
chromosomes found in any other cell in the body, whereas the germ cells only have one
complete set. This creates an exact copy of your DNA and can begin to divide and become a
human.
Cloning could be classified as creating life. When there is no need for human
reproductive systems to create life then that has to be creating life at least in a new way. A
clone is basically just a twin. But because the clone is created unnaturally like in a test tube and
using a cell that has already been created it is not just a twin, it is an exact copy of another
person’s genes.
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
The problems with cloning is the idea of using clones as body parts, they’ve made
movies of this like The Island where all of the people that can afford it make clones that live in
one place and when a person needs a body part they just kill the clone. It is very easy to take
advantage of cloning. People will think of living forever in a sense, to continue to create
themselves over and over. Thinking further a clone could think they are better than a human or
vice versa and then you have discrimination, where one group of people thinks they are better
than another. That could create in the long run a war. There are so many things that could go
wrong with trying to create life, or with robots accidentally creating life.
Creating life is morally wrong, in the book Frankenstein I can say Mary Shelley would
agree, she had her main character create a being and then the being later came and threatened
to wreak havoc on the rest of mankind and then became the result of his demise. Creating life
could be harmful. Humans are not perfect and there is a possibility for a mess up down the line.
Frankenstein has a great example for this, “Even if they were to leave Europe and inhabit the
deserts of the new world, yet one of the first results of those sympathies for which the daemon
thirsted would be children, and a race of devils would be propagated upon the earth who might
make the very existence of the species of man a condition precarious and full of terror.”
(Chapter 20) Frankenstein in this quote is contemplating whether or not he should make the
creature a wife. The creature promised that fi Frankenstein would do so that he would leave
him alone. Frankenstein realizes that they may be able to procreate in the future and he does
not want that. When doctors come out with a new medicine they must test, test, test, and even
after all of the testing there is no way to know whether that medicine will have a long term
effect on human life. The results are limitless; if you think about birth control even though it
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
has been around for years eventually there could be a possibility that we make the female
population sterile. At the point humans would have to resort to cloning anyway!
Frankenstein can show how discovery can be amazing and fulfilling, he says “From the
midst this darkness a sudden light broke upon me—a light so brilliant and wondrous’’ (p 53),
and also how digging too deep into science can be frightening and wrong. ‘‘Learn from me how
dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge’’ (p 54) and he also explains how he felt when
getting into the dark and seductive parts of science, ‘‘none but those who have experienced
them can conceive the enticements of science’’ (p 51). He tries to explain how he became so
obsessed with science and creating life. When Frankenstein starts thinking about creating his
creature he becomes so enticed that he forgets what he truly loves and doesn’t even relies the
seasons changing.
Frankenstein also says that once he was finished with his work he did not feel as
completed as he thought he would and he realized that maybe this wasn’t the best idea.
“During my first experiment a kind of frenzy had blinded me to the horror of my employment;
my mind was intently fixed on the consummation of my labor and my eyes shut to the horror of
my proceedings.”(p 169) I think Mary Shelley was trying to point out the bad effects of getting
to drawn into science. That if a person were get into an experiment it can take over the
scientist’s life and that person could lose what they have always loved just in the pursuit of
knowledge. Cloning and modifying people can end up creating bigger problems than cancer.
There are too many mistakes that can be made so I feel that we need to just let nature control
life, who is made who is not made.
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
Seeing that the book is created in the romantic era I think Mary Shelley was trying to
point out why emotions and the beauty of nature is better than always trying to find reason in
everything. That trying to change the ways of nature can lead to horrible effects. But then there
are other quotes that Frankenstein says that seem she thinks otherwise, “Modern masters ...
have performed miracles. They penetrate into the recesses of nature and show how she works
… they have acquired new and almost unlimited powers.” (p 49) This quote may prove that
Shelley wanted to encourage man to go forth and keep digging into science.
As I said before cloning and creating a human may have its advantage. If it is possible to
create life and modify the human DNA, there should be strict limitations on what you can
change in the human embryo. By being able to change the human genes there is the possibility
of make the human race resistant to certain diseases, and fixing DNA problems. This could be
amazing even though it could run the risk of being used the wrong way like possibly trying to
create a superior race.
In World War 3 Adolf Hitler believed that there was superior race called the Aryan race,
and wanted to make them better as well as eliminate all of the races he thought were inferior.
The Nazi doctors were trying to enhance the race they thought was superior and test on the
races they thought were inferior. Nazi doctors would induce twin pregnancies (clones) so that
there was more of the race, trying to make everyone look the same. Some doctors were cruel
enough to purposely create a child with a sickness or defect so they can experiment on the
child. Many of these doctors where held responsible for their actions at the Nuremburg trials,
after the war.
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
Frankenstein tries to make a superior human even if the book does not outright say he
does. The creature was larger and taller than the average person of the time. Frankenstein also
tried to make the creature attractive. “His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his
features as beautiful. Beautiful!” (Chapter 5) The creature was also stronger and faster than
Frankenstein. Any human put in the situation the creature was in where he had no coat or
supplies for the extremely cold weather would have died. Thinking that the creatures brain was
that of a baby when he was first created, his knowledge increased rapidly. Faster than a human
child’s brain.
When creating life, if you can make a person wouldn’t you want to make the creature
beautiful or attractive? Because the creature looked differently he was out casted which made
him enraged and blamed the human race for his sadness.
Going back to the good possibilities we could end mental illness, and then find new
ways to cure the people that do get sick. Even though finding life can have positive effects
humans are not ready to create life. Humans are a greedy, selfish, and easily corrupted race, if
there is any way to become superior, or to be able to live forever humans would try with all
their might no matter the small consequences. I believe that nature or god (which ever a
person believes) is the creature of life and mankind should not step in and try to change the
human DNA. Man is flawed and there are too many mistakes that can be made. Yes there is a
way to create life but we as human beings should not pursue creating life.
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Maurice Hindle. Frankenstein, or, The modern
Prometheus. Rev. ed. London: Penguin Books, 2003. Print.
Veronica Lake
November 26, 2012
Davies, H.. "Can Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein be read as an early research ethics text?." J
Med Ethics Medical Humanities 2004 (2004): n. pag. group.bmj.com. Web. 19 Dec. 2012.
Michalczyk, John J.. Medicine, ethics, and the Third Reich: historical and contemporary
issues. Kansas City, MO: Sheed & Ward, 1994. Print.
Malley, Austin. The ethics of medical homicide and mutilation,. New York: The DevinAdair company, 1919. Print.
Stevens-Arroyo, Anthony. "Is the church corrupt? - Catholic America - The Washington
Post." Washington Post: Breaking News, World, US, DC News & Analysis. N.p., 23 Apr. 2012.
Web. 20 Dec. 2012. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/catholic-america/post/is-thechurchShah, Anup. "Poverty Facts and Stats — Global Issues." Global Issues : social, political,
economic and environmental issues that affect us all — Global Issues. N.p., 20 Sept. 2010. Web.
20 Dec. 2012. <http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats>.
Tennyson , John. "Advancements in Robotics and Its Future Uses." International Journal
of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 8,. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Dec. 2012.
<http://www.ijser.org/researchpaper%5CAdvancements-in-Robotics-and-Its-Future-Uses.pdf>.
Greenberg,, Andy. "A Step Beyond Human - Forbes.com." Information for the World's
Business Leaders - Forbes.com. N.p., 14 Dec. 2009. Web. 20 Dec. 2012.
<http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/1214/breakthroughs-mit-herr-robotics-step-beyondhuman.html>.