The Responsibility of a Scientist

The theory of electricity didn't just bring the promise of a new, more efficient source of energy, it brought the promise of unlocking the substance of life itself. One of the most significant scientific debates in Europe, during this time period, was the "Vitalist Debate," where scientists argued whether or not the source of life was of divine origin or not. There were two main figures on both sides of this debate. One was Abernethy, who argued that life was based on some mysterious, fundamental "principal of life" that was super-added into human beings to give them life. The other figure was William Lawrence who argued that life was caused by material substances that are inherent to the human body without needing some sort of intervention from something that is outside the human body. Many people believed that the key to the problem of Vitalism lied in electricity. Many scientists like Luigi Galvini and Giovanni Aldini performed experiments where they administered electricity to dead animals and even human corpses in an attempt to reanimate them. 

Pictured: "Science" 

At this time, in light of the experiments of scientists like Aldini and Galvani, the reanimation of the dead seemed like a real scientific possibility. This was a world where science began to explore ideas that seemed blasphemous to explore. This was the world where Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein, the first science fiction novel. 

In Frankenstein, the main character is Victor Frankenstein, a young man studying chemistry in Ingolstadt who becomes obsessed with creating life. He works for many months collecting the remains of corpses and assembling them into his creature. Frankenstein succeeds in his mission and immediately becomes horrified with his creature, who ultimately ends up murdering several of his loved ones. 

It's very easy to read Shelley's novel as a warning for scientists who want to play God, but Shelley's message is much more complicated than that. Despite what Hollywood might want you to believe, Victor Frankenstein is not a "mad scientist," in fact, I wouldn't even call him a scientist. Frankenstein is a student of science. The only true scientists in the novel are his professors, Krempe and Waldman. Shelley paints Waldman as a benevolent mentor for Frankenstein, he is kind and well spoken and represents everything that is right with science. Waldman urges Frankenstein to study all branches of science in order to become a true man of science. At this point in history, science was a much broader term encompassing more than just the "natural philosophies." Waldman urged Frankenstein to broaden his breadth of knowledge to prevent him from becoming a "petty experimentalist."

This is what a true scientist is, a true seeker of knowledge.  Frankenstein is not this. He becomes obsessive, narrows his area of study to fulfill one sick ambition--reanimation of the dead. The crazy thing is that Frankenstein actually succeeds. He creates a living creature, and more than that. He creates a creature with a soul. The "monster" he creates feels, thinks, has desires, feels love, feels hate. The creature becomes murderous because Frankenstein neglects him. 

It's not that the act of creating the creature that is inherently evil. Part of what made Shelley's novel so controversial is that it takes the materialist side in the Vitalist debate. Frankenstein is able to create life out of inorganic material. The evil that comes from his experiment is not in the actual reanimation, it's in the way Victor refused to follow up his experiment and deal with the ramifications of bringing new life into the world.

Discussion Questions:

1. Is the character of Victor Frankenstein a critique of scientists like Aldini and Galvani? What statement is Shelley trying to make about the science of her time?

2. Victor Frankenstein did not consider the consequences of his creation and let his creature go loose, and this led to the death of an innocent child. In the process of creating a female companion for his creature Victor actually thinks about the consequences, and he decides to destroy the creature for the sake of humanity. Was this the right thing to do? Should he have denied his creation a companion?