Tuesday, August 31, 2010
1984 My Question #2
Throughout the novel, the government is tracking it's citizens. Whether this be through the telescreens or the microphones hidden throught Oceania, they are being tracked. This leads to my question to you, are we being tracked by the government today? Mr. P once said that he will never own a cell phone or a GPS because he believed the government will track him through it. After reading 1984, he doesnt seem all to crazy now does he?
1984 Question #1
Throughout the novel, we learn how the Proles are the people who knew of the history of Oceania before the Revolution. Despite knowing the differences between the two society's, they choose to remain quiet. Why is this? Why did they not speak up and try to tell the truth about the real Oceania?
1984 #3
In 1984 the, who controls the past controls the future and who controls the present, controls the past are two slogans that the controlling party follow very closely. In order to have a control in the future, they must be able to control the past. To be able to control the past, they have to lie about it. They lie so people never learn about what society was like before the party came into power. By controlling the past, they are able to make their party look almost godlike as they don't show any signs of doing anything wrong and the people buy into this false status.
The past can only be remembered by human memories or physical evidence from that period. In the case of Oceania, the only evidence theyhave from the past is the lies that Winston helps create. The Proles are the only other group of people that know about the past besides the government, but they remain quiet the entire time. This shows how the past is usually recreated and altered to the likes of whoever is in the most power at the time.
The past can easily be reshaped by the present. Look at the the steroid issue in baseball. All of these "great" athletes were all on the juice. Clemens, Bonds, and Rodriguez were three of the best players our generation has seen but now all their credibility is wiped away due to the face that they were juicers. In the past, all three were locks for the Hall of Fame but now each one of them will not get in because they lied about steroid use and have now been caught. So yeah, the past can be reshaped by the present as new facts are always emerging and questioning the past.
I don't think that historical reality exists. No matter the circumstance, there will always be different opinions on what happened. The only way to uncover the truth is to find out what the person really meant, and that is impossible since they are not living. So the reality is not nearly a reality but more like a consensus of opinions molded into recreating what certain people believe is the past.
Power, authority, and control are all linked to this because whoever has the most power is in control. They are able to instill fear into others to get what they want. They can alter the truth in a way that makes the public forget about the real truth. Most importantly, they are in the postion of the the most power and no one will try to argue with them because they know what the consequences will be.
The past can only be remembered by human memories or physical evidence from that period. In the case of Oceania, the only evidence theyhave from the past is the lies that Winston helps create. The Proles are the only other group of people that know about the past besides the government, but they remain quiet the entire time. This shows how the past is usually recreated and altered to the likes of whoever is in the most power at the time.
The past can easily be reshaped by the present. Look at the the steroid issue in baseball. All of these "great" athletes were all on the juice. Clemens, Bonds, and Rodriguez were three of the best players our generation has seen but now all their credibility is wiped away due to the face that they were juicers. In the past, all three were locks for the Hall of Fame but now each one of them will not get in because they lied about steroid use and have now been caught. So yeah, the past can be reshaped by the present as new facts are always emerging and questioning the past.
I don't think that historical reality exists. No matter the circumstance, there will always be different opinions on what happened. The only way to uncover the truth is to find out what the person really meant, and that is impossible since they are not living. So the reality is not nearly a reality but more like a consensus of opinions molded into recreating what certain people believe is the past.
Power, authority, and control are all linked to this because whoever has the most power is in control. They are able to instill fear into others to get what they want. They can alter the truth in a way that makes the public forget about the real truth. Most importantly, they are in the postion of the the most power and no one will try to argue with them because they know what the consequences will be.
1984 #5
In 1949, George Orwell wrote the novel 1984, as both a prediction and a warning of what society can become. He had visions that are very accurate of what society could become but at the same time, he was completely wrong in other aspects. Despite all his predictions, the room for society to ultimately become what he predicted is still there. A lot can change in a few years. Revolts can suddenly begin and turn Orwell's warning into a reality.
Orwell's predicition of how the facts can be manipulated is accurate in today's society. In the novel, they basically lied about the history of Oceania to prevent the people from learning what it was like before the Revolution. In today's society, facts are still being manipulated. Whether it be the government hiding the facts and creating coverups or whether it be the media, taking something totally out of context and spinning it to hurt the person who said it. Either way you look at it, the facts out there are still not one hundred percent true. I think that Orwell's most accurate prediciton was the different classes in society. In both the novel and today's society, the group with the most power is a small group that governs the country. The group with the least power is the majority. They make up most of the population but still have little power when it comes to the rules on which we live by. The small group at the top is often self-centered due to the fact that they only look for their well being and not of what is in the best interest of the people. Another similarity is the telescreens and the Patriot Act. The telescreens made it possible for the government to monitor the people's every moves while the Patriot Act made it legal for the government to listen to people's phone conversations. Both take away freedom from the person.
Orwell also had a couple of misses when it came to his predicitions. Especially on the language. He thought that the vocabulary would shrink in order to limit what people say but as we know that is not the case in today's society. People are trying to learn new languages and trying to become very diverse because they are interested in other people's cultures. His biggest miss was saying that we would lose our humanity. That is not the case at all as people are still falling in love and getting married everyday. People openly share their emotions with others and are still expressing who they really are, rather than being controlled by someone or something.
While some of Orwell's visions are fairly accurate, there are others that are not even close. But still, this allows us to see the vision that a man had sixty years ago. The potential for is predictions will always be there as one cannot predict what society will do tomorrow.
Orwell's predicition of how the facts can be manipulated is accurate in today's society. In the novel, they basically lied about the history of Oceania to prevent the people from learning what it was like before the Revolution. In today's society, facts are still being manipulated. Whether it be the government hiding the facts and creating coverups or whether it be the media, taking something totally out of context and spinning it to hurt the person who said it. Either way you look at it, the facts out there are still not one hundred percent true. I think that Orwell's most accurate prediciton was the different classes in society. In both the novel and today's society, the group with the most power is a small group that governs the country. The group with the least power is the majority. They make up most of the population but still have little power when it comes to the rules on which we live by. The small group at the top is often self-centered due to the fact that they only look for their well being and not of what is in the best interest of the people. Another similarity is the telescreens and the Patriot Act. The telescreens made it possible for the government to monitor the people's every moves while the Patriot Act made it legal for the government to listen to people's phone conversations. Both take away freedom from the person.
Orwell also had a couple of misses when it came to his predicitions. Especially on the language. He thought that the vocabulary would shrink in order to limit what people say but as we know that is not the case in today's society. People are trying to learn new languages and trying to become very diverse because they are interested in other people's cultures. His biggest miss was saying that we would lose our humanity. That is not the case at all as people are still falling in love and getting married everyday. People openly share their emotions with others and are still expressing who they really are, rather than being controlled by someone or something.
While some of Orwell's visions are fairly accurate, there are others that are not even close. But still, this allows us to see the vision that a man had sixty years ago. The potential for is predictions will always be there as one cannot predict what society will do tomorrow.
1984 #4
In 1984, the controlling party was able to separate individuality and freedom from the individual. Under the government, each persons uniqueness and freedom was stripped as they all had to act in the same manner. Each person had to act how the government wanted them to or they would be made an example of. Their individuality was stripped by the government and they were practically robots of the controlling party.
In the novel, Orwell included the love affair between Winston and Julia to demonstrate the consequences of being stripped of one's freedom. He put this affair into the novel to show that when individual freedom is stripped, the urge is still there. Despite people losing their individual freedom, they all still had the possibility to show who they really were and they could have done that. The love affair is just showing how people will be who they really are despite different orders. They constantly find ways to be together for months and this is an example of them being who they really are.
Each person must be able to keep their individuality or they will practically become a robot under some type of control. To keep their individuality will keep them humane. The ability to feel freedom and emotions are what separate us from everything else. If we did not have these two capabilities, than we would no longer be human. We would still physically be a human being but not emotionally. If we are in fact stripped of liberty and emotions than we are also being stripped of humanity because we are not able to show who we really are.
Despite the governmnet oppressing both Winston and Julia, they both found the time to be together and be who they really are. They were able to feel emotions with eachother and were able to feel the liberty of being with someone that cared for you.
In the novel, Orwell included the love affair between Winston and Julia to demonstrate the consequences of being stripped of one's freedom. He put this affair into the novel to show that when individual freedom is stripped, the urge is still there. Despite people losing their individual freedom, they all still had the possibility to show who they really were and they could have done that. The love affair is just showing how people will be who they really are despite different orders. They constantly find ways to be together for months and this is an example of them being who they really are.
Each person must be able to keep their individuality or they will practically become a robot under some type of control. To keep their individuality will keep them humane. The ability to feel freedom and emotions are what separate us from everything else. If we did not have these two capabilities, than we would no longer be human. We would still physically be a human being but not emotionally. If we are in fact stripped of liberty and emotions than we are also being stripped of humanity because we are not able to show who we really are.
Despite the governmnet oppressing both Winston and Julia, they both found the time to be together and be who they really are. They were able to feel emotions with eachother and were able to feel the liberty of being with someone that cared for you.
1984 #2
While the majority of the people only know the history of what happened after the Revolution, the Proles are the people that know what society was like prior to the Revolution. The Proles are the people that live in Oceania but do not partake in the Party.
For Winston, the Proles symbolize hope due to the fact of what they know. The Proles are the one group of people that did not conform to society and instead chose to keep in touch with reality. They know how to live like actual humans with their own mindset rather than people that are controlled by the government and voice no opinion of their own. They are a form of hope for Winston for how they act as well. They marry out of love and have children because they want to, not because the government requires it.
For Winston, the Proles metaphorically represent the past and future for Oceania. They know what the past was like and they can dictate how the future will be. They can choose to either saty quiet and leave things like they are and let the government control everything. Or they can all gather together and start to preach about how society was like prior to the Revolution and have the others start a new revolution to get back to how things were.
For Oceania to ever return to how it was, the Proles must revolt. Despite knowing alot, they dont realize this and Winston no longer has any desire to get rid of Big Brother. This leaves the Proles as the only people who could start a revolt but they dont realize the possibilities and leave things as is.
For Winston, the Proles symbolize hope due to the fact of what they know. The Proles are the one group of people that did not conform to society and instead chose to keep in touch with reality. They know how to live like actual humans with their own mindset rather than people that are controlled by the government and voice no opinion of their own. They are a form of hope for Winston for how they act as well. They marry out of love and have children because they want to, not because the government requires it.
For Winston, the Proles metaphorically represent the past and future for Oceania. They know what the past was like and they can dictate how the future will be. They can choose to either saty quiet and leave things like they are and let the government control everything. Or they can all gather together and start to preach about how society was like prior to the Revolution and have the others start a new revolution to get back to how things were.
For Oceania to ever return to how it was, the Proles must revolt. Despite knowing alot, they dont realize this and Winston no longer has any desire to get rid of Big Brother. This leaves the Proles as the only people who could start a revolt but they dont realize the possibilities and leave things as is.
1984 #1
In the afterword of 1984, which was written by Eric Fromm, he is describing Orwell's novel as a warning for the future of his readers. The novel is a warning for what might be in the future. It is warning of what the human race is capable of and throughout the whole novel, warnings are being sent by Orwell.
In 1984, the government controls everything. They are able to watch people through the telescreens and via the thought police. Everything is rationed so every person has the same living necessities. The government is trying to control everyones thoughts and trying to determine what each person is thinking. People who act out are made example of and everyone fears that the punishment may happen to them. This allows the government to control the people via fear. This is an example of conformity and Orwell is trying to warn us about how conformity may eventually become dangerous in the future.
Another thing that Orwell is warning us about it how we deal with the past. The government tries to keep a lid on the past and has Winston write lies to modify the truth of what has happened in the past. The reality of the past is buried under so many lies that no one really knows what happened back then. The only thing that people know are what the government tell them has happened. This warning from Orwell is dead on. In today's society we don't look back at what happened, we just act upon instinct. If we would actually take the time to do some research, we can see that we just keep doing the same things. Its like a cycle that never ends and we are responsible for it.
A final warning from Orwell is to watch how society is set up. A small, exclusive party rules over the majority. The inner party has the most power, followed by the outer party, and then followed by the proles. The proles make up the majority of the population. This is much like our society today. We have the President's cabinet, next followed by the senate and house and then comes the rest of the people. The first two parties have all the power and make the rules on everything but are out of touch with what the people want because they are not part of the majority.
George Orwell's 1984, was written as a warning to what may happen to society. He was able to see how society was changing and wrote the novel to warn the people of the dangers of conformity. It also shows how we should study the past more closely so that we don't lose touch with the truth.
In 1984, the government controls everything. They are able to watch people through the telescreens and via the thought police. Everything is rationed so every person has the same living necessities. The government is trying to control everyones thoughts and trying to determine what each person is thinking. People who act out are made example of and everyone fears that the punishment may happen to them. This allows the government to control the people via fear. This is an example of conformity and Orwell is trying to warn us about how conformity may eventually become dangerous in the future.
Another thing that Orwell is warning us about it how we deal with the past. The government tries to keep a lid on the past and has Winston write lies to modify the truth of what has happened in the past. The reality of the past is buried under so many lies that no one really knows what happened back then. The only thing that people know are what the government tell them has happened. This warning from Orwell is dead on. In today's society we don't look back at what happened, we just act upon instinct. If we would actually take the time to do some research, we can see that we just keep doing the same things. Its like a cycle that never ends and we are responsible for it.
A final warning from Orwell is to watch how society is set up. A small, exclusive party rules over the majority. The inner party has the most power, followed by the outer party, and then followed by the proles. The proles make up the majority of the population. This is much like our society today. We have the President's cabinet, next followed by the senate and house and then comes the rest of the people. The first two parties have all the power and make the rules on everything but are out of touch with what the people want because they are not part of the majority.
George Orwell's 1984, was written as a warning to what may happen to society. He was able to see how society was changing and wrote the novel to warn the people of the dangers of conformity. It also shows how we should study the past more closely so that we don't lose touch with the truth.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Frankenstein Question #2
Put yourself in the place of the creature for a second. What would you have done if you were abandoned and had to figure everything out on your own? Would you try to learn the ways of the culture and adapt to it or would you just crawl up into a ball and hide from the world?
Frankenstein Question #1
Has obsession ever controlled your life? Have you ever been as obsessed with a single goal as Frankenstein was with his creation? Have you been obsessed where one goal consumes all of your time and you forget about things that were important to you? Did this obsession have any negative outcomes and did it cause you to regret becoming completely obsessed with that goal?
Frankenstein #5
Towards the end of the novel, Robert Walton finds the monster mourning over the the body of Victor Frankenstein. This created mixed emotions for the reader. The reader would like to feel pity and remorse for the creature but his actions throughout the book make it tough for the creature to deserve these feelings. The creature was devastated and felt some of the blame for Victor's death as he made him completely isolated from others.
At this point, I felt pity for the creature as all he wanted was a friend and Frankenstein was never able to give him this. All the creature needed was one friend, it could have been anybody, even Frankenstein himself. This friendship never occured because Frankenstein felt ashamed of what he created. In the end, Victor is the reason I felt pity for the creature. He never gave the creature a chance. He abandoned it upon creation and was the result for how the creature acted. He ended up hurting others only because he wanted to hurt Victor. He wanted Victor to feel the pain that he had gone through. He wanted Victor to be alone in the world as he was. Overall, he just wanted Victor to feel remorse for leaving him all alone in a world he was unfamiliar with.
Throughout the whole novel, the monster suffered. He had no friends and was killing people of importance to Victor. He felt guilty for this only because he wanted revenge on his creator. Despite killing all of these people, the creature is not a villain. He is more of a product of poor parenting and never had the guidance in his life to teach him right from wrong. A tragedy is a more appropriate word for this situation. The creature never wanted any of this to happen. He felt extreme remorse for his actions and now feels even worse because the only shot of a companion he ever had, is now dead. If he was not abandoned by Victor, no one would have died and the creature could have developed his own sense of right and wrong and may have been able to fit into society.
At this point, I felt pity for the creature as all he wanted was a friend and Frankenstein was never able to give him this. All the creature needed was one friend, it could have been anybody, even Frankenstein himself. This friendship never occured because Frankenstein felt ashamed of what he created. In the end, Victor is the reason I felt pity for the creature. He never gave the creature a chance. He abandoned it upon creation and was the result for how the creature acted. He ended up hurting others only because he wanted to hurt Victor. He wanted Victor to feel the pain that he had gone through. He wanted Victor to be alone in the world as he was. Overall, he just wanted Victor to feel remorse for leaving him all alone in a world he was unfamiliar with.
Throughout the whole novel, the monster suffered. He had no friends and was killing people of importance to Victor. He felt guilty for this only because he wanted revenge on his creator. Despite killing all of these people, the creature is not a villain. He is more of a product of poor parenting and never had the guidance in his life to teach him right from wrong. A tragedy is a more appropriate word for this situation. The creature never wanted any of this to happen. He felt extreme remorse for his actions and now feels even worse because the only shot of a companion he ever had, is now dead. If he was not abandoned by Victor, no one would have died and the creature could have developed his own sense of right and wrong and may have been able to fit into society.
Frankenstein #4
No one is born good or bad. A person's whole persona is the result of their surrounding environment. They are the result of how their elders influence them and their conscience can be the result of bad parenting or lack of parenting. Despite the monster not being born, it still needed to develop it's sense of right and wrong but it didn't receive it. Right after birth, Victor abandoned the monster and left it on its own. The result of Victor's departure left the monster being alone in the world. It had to experience new things and make decisions on its own because it did not have an elder influence to show him the ropes. This is the product of bad parenting as the parent (Victor) was not around to discipline the monster and show him the flow of life.
With this lack of parental support, the monster was forced to live in the wild by himself because people didn't know how to react to something that was so far different from themselves. While in the wild, he found a cottage and began to study the people that lived in the cottage to help him fully understand how people live. He felt comfortable enough with them to introduce himself but once introduced, the people couldn't get over his appearance and they forced themselves to move away. This particular episode developed the monsters first hate for human but more in general his hate for Victor for just leaving him alone in the world.
Once the monster finally met up with Victor again, all he asked for was a female companion so he was not alone in the world. He vowed that they would stay away from civilization and not harm anyone but Victor blew off the demand. This just furthers the idea that Victor was a bad parent. One is supposed to want what is best for their child but he just threw the monster to the side and didn't show any interest in his feelings.
The monster became what he was because of Victor. If Victor chose to stay with the monster, than the whole situation could have became different. The monster could have fit in with society instead of being an outcast. Victor could have had a positive impact on his life that caused him not to hate humans but he chose to neglect him which resulted in the hatred.
With this lack of parental support, the monster was forced to live in the wild by himself because people didn't know how to react to something that was so far different from themselves. While in the wild, he found a cottage and began to study the people that lived in the cottage to help him fully understand how people live. He felt comfortable enough with them to introduce himself but once introduced, the people couldn't get over his appearance and they forced themselves to move away. This particular episode developed the monsters first hate for human but more in general his hate for Victor for just leaving him alone in the world.
Once the monster finally met up with Victor again, all he asked for was a female companion so he was not alone in the world. He vowed that they would stay away from civilization and not harm anyone but Victor blew off the demand. This just furthers the idea that Victor was a bad parent. One is supposed to want what is best for their child but he just threw the monster to the side and didn't show any interest in his feelings.
The monster became what he was because of Victor. If Victor chose to stay with the monster, than the whole situation could have became different. The monster could have fit in with society instead of being an outcast. Victor could have had a positive impact on his life that caused him not to hate humans but he chose to neglect him which resulted in the hatred.
Frankenstein #3
Victor Frankenstein is morally blind. Victor believes that he had done nothing wrong by creating this monster. He blames the monster for the deaths of his friends and family when in reality he should be the one to take the blame. If the monster had not been created, than his friends and family would not have died. Since he created the monster, he should take blame instead of hiding from the truth.
Victor doesn't think that he is responsible for the death of his brother William. When Justine is put on trial, Victor has the chance to speak up and admit the truth to what really happened but he chooses not to. By not speaking up to admit the real killer, the monster, it shows that Victor should be held partially responsible for Justine being sentenced to death. In my opinion, Victor doesn't not really feel remorseful for an innocent girl being sentenced to death. Sure he goes away for a little bit but I think that it is all an act. If he was truly remorseful, he would have spoken up at trial but he chose not to.
Later in the novel, the monster and Victor meet again. The monster tells Victor his desire for a female companion. He tells Victor that no one will be harmed if his demand is met but if it is not, than he shall be expecting a visit from the monster on his wedding night and Elizabeth will be killed. Victor decides not to meet the monsters demand and on the wedding night, Victor inexcusably leaves Elizabeth alone and she is murdered by the monster. There was no reason to leave her alone. The only reason I can think of why he left her was because he felt like if anything happened it wasn't his fault, it was the monsters fault.
I do think that deep down Victor desired for Elizabeth to be killed. He could have prevented the death but decided to do nothing to stop it. I think that Victor and the monster are in fact doubles of one another. They both have the same feelings but only the monster is able to accomplish their goals. The monster can stand for Victor's "heart of darkness." It can be this because Victor lacks the will to do anything himself but he knows that the monster will and he takes advantage of this.
Victor doesn't think that he is responsible for the death of his brother William. When Justine is put on trial, Victor has the chance to speak up and admit the truth to what really happened but he chooses not to. By not speaking up to admit the real killer, the monster, it shows that Victor should be held partially responsible for Justine being sentenced to death. In my opinion, Victor doesn't not really feel remorseful for an innocent girl being sentenced to death. Sure he goes away for a little bit but I think that it is all an act. If he was truly remorseful, he would have spoken up at trial but he chose not to.
Later in the novel, the monster and Victor meet again. The monster tells Victor his desire for a female companion. He tells Victor that no one will be harmed if his demand is met but if it is not, than he shall be expecting a visit from the monster on his wedding night and Elizabeth will be killed. Victor decides not to meet the monsters demand and on the wedding night, Victor inexcusably leaves Elizabeth alone and she is murdered by the monster. There was no reason to leave her alone. The only reason I can think of why he left her was because he felt like if anything happened it wasn't his fault, it was the monsters fault.
I do think that deep down Victor desired for Elizabeth to be killed. He could have prevented the death but decided to do nothing to stop it. I think that Victor and the monster are in fact doubles of one another. They both have the same feelings but only the monster is able to accomplish their goals. The monster can stand for Victor's "heart of darkness." It can be this because Victor lacks the will to do anything himself but he knows that the monster will and he takes advantage of this.
Frankenstein #2
1. In Greek mythology, Prometheus was known for being extremely intelligent. Prometheus had the intellect to steal fire from Zeus and give it to humans. His punishment for stealing from Zeus was that he was chained to a rock and an eagle would eat his liver neach day. Everyday his liver would grow back and the eagle would eat it again. It is said that Prometheus can be credited with the existence of mankind as mankind would not have been able to function without the existences of fire.
One can make many similarities between Prometheus and Frankenstein. Frankenstien can be made out to be a Promethean character. Both Prometheus and Frankenstein had a very strong intrigue in human life. Prometheus wanted to give humans fire to humans to keep them alive while Frankenstein wanted to make a human come to life. Both of them became totally obsessed to the point where Prometheus stole from a God and Frankenstein would use human body parts to restore life.
Their obsession of humans eventually led to each's downfall. Prometheus was chained to rock and had his liver eaten out and lived a very painful life while Frankenstein, had to endure alot more mental punishment rather than physical punishment. He had to live with the fact that he had created a monster and he was unsure what this monster had the capability to do.
2. Dr. Faustus was a character that also had an obsession: an obsession to know more. He made a deal with the devil. He was able to gain knowledge and power but at the same time, he had to sell his soul to the devil. His new knowledge was enough to completely captivate his life as he stopped caring about many things and this led to him becoming very unhappy and eventually to his downfall.
Dr. Faustus and Frankenstein are almost the exact same person. Both Faustus and Frankenstein become completely obsessed with the will to know more, that they both lose interest in the little things that make life worth living for. Frankenstein obsesses about his creation and loses touch with his family and is eventually a hermit because he is so isolated. Both Faustus and Frankenstein become miserable because of the amount of time they spent of work. All-consuming ambition can be postitive as one can really be dedicated to a goal they are trying to acheive but at the same time, it can physically and mentally drain a person and lead to that particular person's downfall.
One can make many similarities between Prometheus and Frankenstein. Frankenstien can be made out to be a Promethean character. Both Prometheus and Frankenstein had a very strong intrigue in human life. Prometheus wanted to give humans fire to humans to keep them alive while Frankenstein wanted to make a human come to life. Both of them became totally obsessed to the point where Prometheus stole from a God and Frankenstein would use human body parts to restore life.
Their obsession of humans eventually led to each's downfall. Prometheus was chained to rock and had his liver eaten out and lived a very painful life while Frankenstein, had to endure alot more mental punishment rather than physical punishment. He had to live with the fact that he had created a monster and he was unsure what this monster had the capability to do.
2. Dr. Faustus was a character that also had an obsession: an obsession to know more. He made a deal with the devil. He was able to gain knowledge and power but at the same time, he had to sell his soul to the devil. His new knowledge was enough to completely captivate his life as he stopped caring about many things and this led to him becoming very unhappy and eventually to his downfall.
Dr. Faustus and Frankenstein are almost the exact same person. Both Faustus and Frankenstein become completely obsessed with the will to know more, that they both lose interest in the little things that make life worth living for. Frankenstein obsesses about his creation and loses touch with his family and is eventually a hermit because he is so isolated. Both Faustus and Frankenstein become miserable because of the amount of time they spent of work. All-consuming ambition can be postitive as one can really be dedicated to a goal they are trying to acheive but at the same time, it can physically and mentally drain a person and lead to that particular person's downfall.
Frankenstein #1
Advancements in science and knowledge can be very beneficial to the human race. Man shouldn't be afraid to try to push their horizon and discover new things. At the same time, man must be careful as to what they are creating and must approach with caution, as it could have a negative impact. My belief is that despite being able to create things with human like properties, scientists shouldn't be allowed to create something that is close to a human.
Erastus Darwin, Cornelius Agrippa, Albertus Magnus, and Paracelsus were all similar in the fact that they each studied fields that were highly controversial at the time. Darwin studied galvanism while Agrippa, Magnus, and Paracelus all studied the occult arts. These scientists were able to influence others. One of these influences was on Mary Shelley as she created the character Victor Frankenstein.
Every new scientific discovery always brings the question of morality into the equation. One always must keep in the back of their mind that if they should continue with this advancement, could something with a negative outcome take place. Today, many people are arguing the morality of new advancements such as nanotechnology and embryonic stem cell research.
Nanotechnology has became the latest target of controversy. It is beneficial to the point where it can be used in medical fields for energy production. The controversy is that the toxicity has yet to be determined as scientists do not fully know the effect it may have on the environment.
Another huge controvery is the issue of stem cell research. Everyone knows that the benefits from stem cells are plentiful but at the same time, it destroys unborn embryos. Stem cell researh can be used to help the disabled and ultimately find cures for diseases but people are not satisfied because it is taking away an unborn child.
Like the Frankenstien discovery, both nanotechnology and stem cell research are extremely controverisal. They could help the world with certain porblems but at the same time, the risk of harming the world is just as great. Victor didnt take time to weigh the pros and cons and his creation of a monster was unnecessary.
Erastus Darwin, Cornelius Agrippa, Albertus Magnus, and Paracelsus were all similar in the fact that they each studied fields that were highly controversial at the time. Darwin studied galvanism while Agrippa, Magnus, and Paracelus all studied the occult arts. These scientists were able to influence others. One of these influences was on Mary Shelley as she created the character Victor Frankenstein.
Every new scientific discovery always brings the question of morality into the equation. One always must keep in the back of their mind that if they should continue with this advancement, could something with a negative outcome take place. Today, many people are arguing the morality of new advancements such as nanotechnology and embryonic stem cell research.
Nanotechnology has became the latest target of controversy. It is beneficial to the point where it can be used in medical fields for energy production. The controversy is that the toxicity has yet to be determined as scientists do not fully know the effect it may have on the environment.
Another huge controvery is the issue of stem cell research. Everyone knows that the benefits from stem cells are plentiful but at the same time, it destroys unborn embryos. Stem cell researh can be used to help the disabled and ultimately find cures for diseases but people are not satisfied because it is taking away an unborn child.
Like the Frankenstien discovery, both nanotechnology and stem cell research are extremely controverisal. They could help the world with certain porblems but at the same time, the risk of harming the world is just as great. Victor didnt take time to weigh the pros and cons and his creation of a monster was unnecessary.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)