These chapters capture pivotal moments in the novel. Do you believe humans should tamper with death? Should they try to bring back the dead or try to extend life through scientific experimentation such as stem cell research, etc. Explain. Use text evidence and outside resources such as scientific articles, historical facts, the Bible, mythology, etc.
Staying in the context of Frankenstein, I believe that humans should not tamper with death, bring back the dead, nor try to extend life through scientific experimentation. Victor Frankenstein's experience with his newly created monster shows how science cannot control the actions of whatever we create, and it also shows its effects on one's emotional stability.
ReplyDeleteSkipping towards the end of Chapter six, where Victor finds himself at the site of his brother's murder, he reports that "A flash of lightning illuminated [an] object" (Shelley 80) which happened to be the "filthy demon to whom I had given life"(80), "he was the murderer" (81). At this very moment, Victor realizes that his arrogance to conquer nature and be superior to God led him to create something that killed his brother. Victor's abandonment of his monster caused his monster to take revenge on him. This shows that even your creations can find ways to destroy you, so it is best to let human life be human life.
On another note, Victor became mentally ill that he possessed a wildness in his eyes that made him lifeless for quite some time. Many would refer to this as psychosis. Psychosis is a condition that affects the way your brain processes information. It causes you to lose touch with reality. Which is exactly what Victor went through. He disconnected from his friends and family to form his creation, he lost hours of sleep, and once he created it, he developed anxiety and had difficulty concentrating. This mental incapability to live a normal life after creating a new form of life can be crucial to the progression of humanity since there won't be mentally stable people progressing.
Victor serves as a prime example as to why humans should not tamper with death.
We can also look at things from a scientific perspective and see how even scientists agree that bringing back life from the dead is not a good idea. Although scientist's main focus is to bring back extinct species, it is evident that there are issues, according to ScienceMag.com, "The spread of genes can be difficult to control...it would be really easy to manufacture forests, savannas, and oceans full of Franken-species and Eco-zombies." This exmeplifies the idea that we cannot control the actions of whatever we create. Tampering with death will only cause problems, but the genes in these animals could possibly spread to us.
It'd just be chaotic.
Karina Perez- Period 5.
ReplyDeleteIn all cases, I believe that it’s inhumane and irrational to tamper with death. Scientific experiments, such as the one presented in Frankenstein, are not amusing or beneficial whatsoever. Don’t get me wrong, movies and novels such as Frankenstein are intriguing however, to actually perform such experiments is barbaric to me. Throughout chapters 4-6, we see a journey of emotions that Victor goes through. He at first is so invested that he loses all social interaction just for the sake of achieving his utmost goal. Once he’s completed his creation, he is disappointed on all levels, “I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart” (70). Here, he elaborates on how his curiosity got the best of him and how it destroyed his dream. He devoted all his time to his work, avoiding everything at all cost, all for what? To be mortified by his creation? To be disappointed? Not to mention how his reaction to his creation was egoistic since appearance to Victor is very important. He avoided his mother’s last dying wish because of his ambitions. He lost himself along the way.. Overall, it's been proven, by Victor Frankenstein, that not everything is made to be tampered with.
I defenity agree with you because even in every fiction books that talk about real people tampering with death never ends good. You also brought up intersting points that frankestien book is a great example why a person should not tamper with death.victor was basically to obsessed with death that he became insane and forgot his family and just became a mystery.Not only that but death is correlates with the gothic ideas. As well as that their is ;roof that people who tamper with death end up seeing a preist and it just becomes very crazy.So that is why I agree with you
Delete-jasmin.s
DeleteThis was definitely an emotional roller coaster for Victor. Could you imagine putting all your energy into something you claimed to love and end up hating it? I cannot. Maybe, Victor's story, although fictional can teach scientists a lesson? You also bring up an interesting idea when you say that not all things are made to be tampered with. If you don't mind me asking you, could you provide examples of things that are meant to be tampered with? I'm curious to know. Overall, great answer to the question. You showed a lot of emotion along and used great evidence.
ReplyDeleteKarina Perez
DeleteHello Yadira!
To answer your question, the experiment having to do with cloning is very wrong to me. It's very unethical to me. I believe situations such as those should not be tampered with. We were all made to be different and I don't think cloning appreciates the idea of how unique we are.
Do I believe that humans should tamper with death, yes to a certain extent. I believe that our curiosity takes us to places that no one individual had ever gone before. Being able to answer questions that were not possible decades ago not only brings pride onto ourselves but also revolutionizes the world that we live in. Some may argue that death is inevitable which is true however, it comes with certain limitations that have allowed humankind to advance. For example, according to ourwordindata.org, roughly 10 million people die from cancer each year. Those include a vast array of ages with each different complication that differentiates one patient from another. Cancer cells are continuously dividing without any control during the cell dividing mitosis thus leading to tumors and many other atrocious side effects. Without proper diagnosis or medicine, cancer often leads to death. Nonetheless, the discovery of treatments such as chemotherapy, surgery, radiation, immune therapy, and targeted therapy has allowed our civilization to “skip past death” and give people another chance at life. This form of death tampering in my opinion is acceptable by many and is the prime example of extending life beyond what our time has decided.
ReplyDeleteIn a more specific context, bringing back the dead through stem cell research or any other scientific experimentation should not be allowed for many accounts of ethical reasoning. In Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, Victor regrated the fact that he created a monster and was afraid of his creation, “though it made me shiver, that the creature within while I had let in my apartment might still be there…. I dreaded to behold this monster… but when assured that my enemy had indeed fled, I clapped my hands for joy.” The weight was lifted upon Victor’s shoulders when he knew that the monster is no longer occupying his home explicitly shows how much he regretted raising someone from the dead. His curiosity got the best of him and it led to a discovery that should have not to happen. It is a matter of ethical or unethical which in this context, bringing the dead can only bring fear onto the eyes of the creator.
Using historical events, Albert Einstein a famous physicist who discovered the theory of relativity publicly expressed deep regret after their invention of the atomic bomb was used. This is a great example of what Victor Frankenstein is currently feeling. Scientific discovery often starts with the great intention to out beat a country, become the first, or discover something new, but often enough it often leads to a mistake and should have not had happened from the start.
Karina Perez
DeleteHello Drexler!
Your response is so insightful and interesting. Everything about this response shows sophistication. I think it's unethical overall to tamper with death. We were not meant to live forever. This world has it's imperfections and I think tampering with death for any circumstance is not only wrong but would completely mess with the balance of nature. Without suffering there would be no compassion and for a world without compassion is a world full of ego. Thank you for introducing me to a different perspective on this response!
Brenda Zepeda
ReplyDeleteThis is a tough question to answer. Death is inherently our past, and we've all heard that saying before. "Learn from the past." There is so much to be learned from those who have passed on. We could study the blood of someone who had sickle cell anemia or observe the brain of someone who had dementia or examining the nervous system of a life-long quadriplegic.
We've already tampered with death, that's how we've become so familiar with it. Had it not been for the doctors who decided to look into a cadaver for the first time, most of our modern medicine would not exist. Although, its our human nature to be curious and want to discover new things, just like Victor. I believe we should focus on the living rather than the dead but don't take this to mean that we shouldn't, for lack of better terms, research death. We have come to learn many things about the human bodies from researching cadavers that. Taking on research from cadavers may help us better understand the human race, but we shouldn't give all of our efforts to the dead.
Let's talk about women's health for a second. Its a field of science that has yet to be dissected to its fullest capacity. Most women aren't even aware of all the illnesses or diseases that you can get just from being a woman, let alone taking into account personal situations. According to the Society of Women's Health Research, most scientist believe women to be "hormonal versions of men and that women's menstrual cycles made them more difficult to study." Although I hate to say it, this is a perfect example of were our biological sciences should be expanding.
Not to mention, all the forms of treatments that are available to saves peoples lives. Let's take chemotherapy into consideration. Is it not meant to stop a person from passing on? Are Epi-pens not meant to save a person from anaphylactic shock? Theres are just a few of the instances were science has tampered with death. But are we not better for it? How many countless lives have been saved because someone thought of studying the human body and all its different intricacies?
From my point of view, tampering with death is a double-edged sword. We can either advance as a species and learn more about ourselves or give into the nonsensical and stay in the dark for certain fields of study.
This is a hard question to answer. There are so many if’s. Based on Frankenstein and almost every movie or book and I have watched or read, humans should not tamper with death. It never ends well. Those that are ‘revived’ end up with some type of mental incapacity and emotional instability. Either way, trying to bring back the dead can also affect those that are left behind. They already went through the trauma and grief of losing a loved one and they would have to go through it all over it again, if it fails, which it most likely will. There is also the question of whether or not the deceased would want to be brought back. Unless they knew beforehand that they were going to die, there is no way to get consent from them. They should be the only ones to decide this because it is in fact their body.
ReplyDelete^Adriana Carmona Cruz
DeleteLisa Nguyen
ReplyDeleteIn short, this phenomenon which humans are able to take on the role of being God never fails to provoke my sense of ethics and more than often--accumulative curiosity. However, as enticing as it may sound, I stand firm when I say that humans should tamper with death but only to a certain degree. To explore the extent that I briefly mentioned, I would like to mention the Hela cells, also known as the world’s very first immortal human cell line. A backstory about these incredible cells is that they were taken from a dying patient in the name of Henrietta Lacks, who at the time had cervical cancer. When her doctors discovered the amazing ability that her cancer cells held they were able to utilize and manipulate these “dead” but living cells to produce the biggest medical breakthrough in the history of science. Not only did these immortal cells made available for scientists and biomedical researchers all over the world, these cells were the backbone to the development of the polio and HIV vaccines--to name the few--saving thousands of people each and every year. Nonetheless, the contributions that these immortal cells made are far from the work that Victor Frankenstein brewed in his lab.
When Frankenstein devoted his energy into taking on the hands of God, he never once considered how his creation would benefit his society as a whole. In fact, his quest to seek glory caused him more pain than ever knowing that he traded his knowledge at his own ethical expense. As chapter six concludes with the founding of his brother’s death, Franenstein is engulfed with bitterness and grief because he realizes that the real monster is not the one that he gave life to but rather himself--his greed for the silver ounce of honor given to his name.
In retrospect, Shelley’s intentions with her book is not meant to evoke fear or judgement toward science and its home brilliance to mankind, instead she warns us about the repercussions of scientific advancement. Doing so, we are kept accountable for what we create and what would be destroyed within the process.
You make a great point because scientists do experiments to help future generations and prevent more loss. While Victor had no notion of making this being a helping member of society he was just tediously playing with the idea of life and death. He had his own selfish wishes in mind when creating this monster. He wanted to experiment on this pile of human parts so that one day he could bring back his mother. He should have really thought about what he was going to do when this creature came to live.
DeleteIt is interesting hearing a different side to extending life. Never knew about the Hela cells its very fascinating.
Delete-Samantha Serrano
I believe people should not tamper with death because at times it can drive a person insane such as how victor became a totally different person. In the perspective of religious people they have their own god which would contradict the natural way of life. Bringing people back to life is not normal and essentially it is not natural. In the news from Mexico and other places in the world have shown when people tamper with death it does not end well. The goth element can be a very dangerous thing.It may be a personality and obsession but it is not something a person would want to connect wiith.My evidence is common sense and common knowledge. There are researchers who yet don't know things about death and the power of technology. So for a person like victor who is extremely intelligent and knows many things about technology in the end nobody really knows the consequences of tampering with life and death.
ReplyDeleteI believe that scientists should not bring back the dead because people have already suffered the first death. What is going to stop them from feeling that they might lose that same loved one again? That would be twice as hard on the loved ones, physically and mentally. Also what is to say that the person that is brought from the dead will act and be the same as before they died. There is a lot at risk trying to bring back a person that is dead and to the loved ones that are trying to accept the death.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think that we should extend life to those that want to live longer. I think it is important to try to save as many lives with organ transplants and other possibilities that can provide people with longer and fuller lives. The article “The Kidney Transplant Waitlist” exploits the fact that people have waited between 3-5 years on this long list of candidates waiting for essentially a person to die to give them a kidney that could save their life. The longer they wait the more their condition can get worse. That can make them unable to get better or receive an organ and all that waiting was worth nothing. Why must we have family members pray and ask for someone to die to provide their family members a chance to live longer? It is also hard for family and friends to see their loved ones drain their life and energy out every day that passes. That is a very twisted way to think but I know that those family members realize this fact but their family member is more important to them than a random stranger. I believe stem cell research can create artificial organs that can help those long lists get short without having a person die for it. There are many vaccines that are given to help prevent people from dying of many illnesses. Every day people are extending their life by eating healthy and exercising. So why not help people live longer so they can see their kids and grandchildren or even great-grandchildren get older. People can be able to experience their life to the fullest.
I really like your whole response because you provide the perspective of not only one person, but of the loved ones and how bringing people back from the dead can cause. Just like Victor was so focused on his praise that would come with his creation of the monster, he did not quite think about how this creation would affect others. -Citlaly
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI don’t believe humans should bring back the dead because it’s a natural part of life and once it is done, I think it is best left alone. Taking Victor as my first example, when he was creating the monster, he was so focused on his creation that it became his only focus. Victor ignored his family and his health leading him to be very ill. After the monster had been alive, Victor was so careless about the monster’s state and what it would be doing or how it would be affecting others. When Victor said, “A new species would bless me as its creator and source..” we clearly see that Victor thought more about the praise that would be produced by his creation and not the aftermath of the monster. Taking a different example of tampering with death would be de-extinction. This has been talked about in previous years on how bringing back extinct animals could help the environment. Although that may be true, I think that instead of bringing back animals that have already died most likely because of factors caused by humans, we should focus on how we can keep the animals we have now alive along with what we can fix in the environment now. Or just like Victor, we would focus our energy on the deceased and ignore the living. Although I disagree with bringing back the dead, extending life happens now with scientific procedures such as transplants along with certain medications that should definitely be kept around.
DeleteI agree with you Citlaly, life should be left alone and not tempered with. The creation of Frankenstein's monster became went from a project to an obsession of his that need to succeed in order for him to become a someone in society. He was careless and did not think and the possible consequences that were yet to come. In result of his ignorance to this consequence it cause the death of his brother William.
Delete^^^
DeleteLeilani Colin
Samantha Serrano
ReplyDeleteDeath is the natural way of life. It is the inevitable and there is no way to cheat it. From films to books, whenever some scientist or mystical being attempts to resurrect the dead, there is always consequences. For example, Victor after feeling a great deal of happiness, he was filled with horror after doing the deed. One can say he was paranoid and soon after quickly fell into sickness. Victor is an excellent example on why humans shouldn't tamper with death. Why try to extend the inevitable if you can die at any second? And at what cost? Creating a being that will not adapt to todays world can be cruel.Not to mention the harm that it can do to others. Aside from that there will be a tremendous amount of overpopulation and the damage it can do to not only the economy but to the environment. In addition, why waste money on scientific experiments such as stem cell research and many others when the money used for that can be used in finding cures and such.
I agree with you because we do not have the proper protocol to help the person being revived emotionally and physically along with the trauma the scientist may go through as well. You bring up a good point about the overpopulation as I have not thought of that in which could affect our economy along with our food resources. The other thing that we would be risking is bringing back disease that have disappeared or bring in new diseases that can wipe out the population. - Evelyn Padilla
DeleteI do not believe humans should tamper with death because it is natural and man should not play God. However, when it comes to science getting involved with extending someone's life I feel that it is fine because it is helping them stay healthy for as long as possible such as helping those who have cancer, or damaged organs. Bringing forth Frankenstein, Victor is horrified because he did not fully expect life to come about after his experiment and although he is proud of his success he is also mortified and becomes terribly ill. Personally, I believe his sickness was part of the consequences God brought to Victor for trying to play his role. Victor also directly states in the story that he wants to be praised as "a creator," Implying that he already believes he is a God. Ultimately, this is also the reason why the monster reeks so much havoc on Victor's life since he is not fully human but a monster. Similar consequences have also been seen played out in the real world with Dolly the cloned sheep. A few years back scientists tried to clone a sheep, and her name was Dolly. The poor animal ended up coming out with several health conditions and died shortly after because as I have stated before, man is not God. Overall, I truly believe that although it may be possible for a man to try and create life or pause death, God will ultimately punish those who partake in such actions.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you, I love the phrase that you used that "man should not play God"
Delete-Samantha Serrano
Hi Linda, I agree with you. I believe that it is okay when it comes to helping extend ones life because it is done in a safe manner and the person is not dead so you want to help them have the best quality of life. Also I really like what you said "man should not play God."
Delete- Clara Garza
Leilani Colin
ReplyDelete- I believe that humans should not tamper with death, or bring back the dead, through scientific experimentation. Victor's experience with his man made monster shows how science does not always control the actions of creation, and it also shows its effects on one's emotional stability. For example, as Victor created the monster, he was so focused on succeeding with his creation that it became his only focus. Victor ignored his family and health which resulted in him becoming ill. Once the monster had been given life, Victor was did not take in mind the monster’s state of mind and physical state, including the harm the creature could do to others. When Victor said, “A new species would bless me as its creator and source..” Here we clearly see that Victor was caught up in the praise that he would receive by the success of his creation and not the aftermath of the monster. The harm his monster has possibly can cause to other but to his family as we see in Williams death.
Humans are just adjusting to the idea of people with different ethnicities, races, and genders adding another species will just do more harm than Good. Scientists should not tamper with death as we do not know the consequences. There could be all sorts of new diseases to appear and also a new species of humans which will add to more stereotypes and new norms which can affect society. We also don’t know how that can affect the brain and the body and the soul. In the bible, Jesus awakened from death because he needed to create the kingdom in order to let the souls into heaven but also experience the temptations of mankind in order to set an example and put fair laws for mankind to follow. According to the Smithsonian Magazine slavery has been around for 496 years and they were chosen based on the color of their skin if the color of their skin made them become slaves and be subjected to racism what will happen to those who have been dead and then revived. They will be subjected to the possibility of racism and trauma. Not only the person being revived will have some traumatic experiences but also the scientists working on that will have some traumatic experiences as well. There is an urge to push more emotional help for the people who perform CRP according to Wilson Kwong in the article “ Performing CPR can save someone’s life. It can also cause you trauma.” If the people who are doing a simple task in which they know the possible factors and have been trained properly have trouble coping with that situation. Imagine the trauma they would go through without having a proper protocol to protect them and help them emotionally. Much more less help the people who have a different situation by being revived.
ReplyDeleteEvelyn Padilla
I believe that humans should not tamper with death because death is a natural part of life and once it happens we should not try and undo what has already been done. A huge example of why scientists should not tamper with death is Victor. During Victor’s time creating the monster, he was overly obsessed. He was so obsessed that he ignored his family and his health whiched caused him to later face bad health issues. At this point Victor no longer cared about anything other than this creation. After the monster was created, Victor did not care about what the monster was doing or how it was affecting other people. He was solely focused on the praise that would come with completing this creation, not the affect this monster would have on society. In addition, there are many questions that come to mind. One article questions bringing back the dead to what extent? As in if we were to bring back the dead will the scientists be able to bring them back emotionally as well and not only physically. There are so many unknown factors of tampering with death that it’s probably unsafe to do so. Like Victor, I believe that scientists who attempt this will be consumed with the glory and “hype” that comes with it rather than focusing on the safety of society.
ReplyDelete- Clara Garza
Delete