Egoism In Frankenstein Research Paper

1004 Words5 Pages

Mary Shelley's iconic novel, Frankenstein, is often considered a cautionary tale about the dangers of scientific ambition. However, the novel's themes extend far beyond scientific advancement and delve into complex questions of social ethics. Shelley's portrayal of Victor Frankenstein's battle with unintentional egoism and his conscious struggles with Kantian first and second formulation highlights the ethical implications of science and technology; and the importance of social responsibility.
"Frankenstein" can be connected to philosophical egoism, as both explore the concept of self-interest and the pursuit of personal satisfaction. Philosophical egoism is the theory that individuals always act in their own self-interest, motivated by the …show more content…

Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who created the two categorical imperatives on which to live your life. The first formulation of Kant's Categorical Imperative, "act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law," emphasizes the need for ethical consistency. Victor's creation of the monster is based on a maxim that he cannot will to become a universal law, as it would result in chaos and destruction. The second formulation, "act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end," stresses the importance of treating others with respect and dignity. Victor's treatment of his creation as a mere experiment rather than a sentient being highlights his failure to uphold this …show more content…

In "Frankenstein," the creature is constantly treated as a means to an end, as he is exploited and used by various characters in the novel. For example, Victor uses the creature as a means to satisfy his own scientific curiosity, while other characters see the creature as a tool for their own personal gain. The treatment of the creature as a means to an end can be seen as a violation of the second formulation of the categorical imperative because the creature is not being treated as an end in