Shelley's Argument Against Scientific Technology

We could use the novel, Frankenstein, as an argument against scientific technology that creates life forms or argue that it is not technology itself but the use to which it is put that presents an ethical problem. What is Shelley’s position? What is your position? Are we currently using or abusing nature for our benefit? Can we develop a “symbiotic” relationship with nature?

Mankind has always tried to understand and interpret the world. Seeking explanations of natural phenomena and the creation of human being, trying to benefit and improve their life style. We can see this in novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley or in movies like “ I, Robot” by Isaac Asimov. Scientifics discover or invent things trough technology for beneficial use, but what happen if things that scientists invented aren't beneficial? Most likely they have repercussions that eventually can affect. The technological advances of the last century lead to new projects, through genetic engineering and synthetic biology.

Interest in artificial life appears in the classical Greco-Latinos. We can see this idea taking as a basic point of reference in the work of Shelley with Frankenstein, which analyses taking into account the

He created artificial life trying to explain how it originated. The cloned animals are another attempt to create artificial life, the experiments began in 1997 with Dolly the sheep. But the most common is the genetic manipulation trying to create new species or improve existing ones. Organisms genetically modified are called transgenic. Genetic manipulation has many benefits, improving crop is one of them. It supposes important progress in the fight against diseases such as diabetes, some cancers and others hereditary diseases. Although they have many advantages, they also pose ethical problems, often motivated by the interests and bad practices of multinational