birth to the Creature, an innovative scientific product. By using the heterocosm, the vitalist debate becomes more narrowed down and discussion of soul is more conspicuous in the Creature. Through the mimetic world, it becomes easier for us to understand Shelley’s point on soul.
Going back to the “vitalist debate”, soul actually carries important functions so people are very fascinated by arguing whether soul exists. In the debate, Abernethy strongly insists in the existence of soul seemingly because of its connection to human’s morality but indeed for the traditional convenience of governance. Sharon explains that “for Abernethy and other Tory vitalists the principle of life has…ability to control and regulate body” and “a check is needed to
…show more content…
First, Shelley is constructing a new relationship between religion and science. What she observes from the “vitalist debate” is that professionals either prefer science’s subordinate status to religion or science’s radical independence from religion. In the “hetercosm” Frankenstein, we neither need to use science to explain religious concepts nor need to use religion to understand scientific facts. However, we also don’t have to eliminate anything religious in science. I agree with Marilyn Butler’s regarding the Creature as a continuation of Frankenstein’s scientific experiment. She states that “[b]y tracking his own maturation, from a solitary to a social animal, the Creature succeeds in the task Frankenstein abandons, that of scientifically following up Frankenstein’s technological achievement” (Butler, 258). Here we see a blending of science and soul because scientific product can achieve to develop itself. Mary Shelley doesn’t deny the existence of soul in the Creature but what she wants to strengthen is that soul only exits when its owner build it. Mary Shelley seems to convey the idea that science and religion can coexist