Assignment # 8

In Mary Shellie's Frankenstein, she explores the depths of the human creation.  The question of unlimited advancement of science is a very delicate one.  While one may say that if we could make life better why shouldn't we continue to push the envelope, the only problem would be: would it really be better?  Perhaps death is something that we should accept instead of playing God.  The issue of human cloning has an eerie ressemblance to the theory of Frankenstein.  While one is more gruesome, the concept is the same.  the problem with Science is that even if certain things are illegal, that doesn't mean someone won't do it.  So at the end of the day, the issue will not be circumventable.  The only thing we can do as a society is try to shape the morality of the social conscious of the people as a whole.  As depicted in Frankenstein, human ambition can sometimes backfire.  Dr. Victor Frankenstein's quest to create life while successful came at the price of his own life.  Not in the literal sense but in the sense that living is more than just being alive.  Being alive also and more importantly involves loving, having a community, and a sense of identity.  I can however say, that Dr. Frankenstein’s  act in creating life was actually a moral one under Kantian Ethics.  Kantian Ethics adhere to the following, 

"Because motive is the most important factor in Kantian ethics, it is possible for an action to have negative consequences while still being a moral act. For example, if acting out of a sense of duty you attempt to save a drowning child, but in the process you accidentally drown the child, your action is still considered a moral one" (http://www.theologicalstudies.org/articles/article/1527417/17142.htm).
  
When Victor experienced the death of a loved one he had a duty to spare others his pain in facing death; therefore his quest in creating life had just intentions.