Frankenstein vs frankenfoods

Frankenstein vs. Frankenfoods In modern day society scientific advancement is reaching all new levels. Since the scientific revolution people have thrived on making new innovations that make our day to day life easier, more productive, healthier, and most importantly efficient. One such scientific advancement is genetically modified foods otherwise known as Frankenfoods. For example, tomatoes that are grown for the purpose of consumption are now injected with various steroids and have their genomes altered in order to make the larger, tastier, and ‘ better’ alternative for the consumer. This topic directly relates into the story of Frankenstein. In this book Vincent Frankenstein is faced with numerous dilemmas related to his creation of a monster out of used human parts. At one point in the novel Frankenstein has to contemplate whether or not he should create a mate for the monster. This question raises both moral and ethical questions because at what point does scientific advancement cross the line over into ones person self fulfillment and conquest? Scientific ambition whether it is genetically modified foods, creating a monster, or any other scientific endeavors must take this question into consideration before coming to fruition. One of the tragedies for Victor Frankenstein is the refusal of other characters in the novel to recognize the monster as a full human being. This problem leads the monster to become anti-social and becomes a darker, more evil figure. In order to fulfill the monsters desires for a relationship or contact with other beings, the monster requests that Frankenstein create another monster to become his mate. Trying to scare Frankenstein for not creating his mate, the monster resorted to threats. The first monster threatened Frankenstein and even his family. If Frankenstein does create a companion for his first creation, he may be endangering others. If there is another monster, there will be twice the power and possibly twice the evil, which could hurt or kill his family. When and if Frankenstein commits the moral sin of creating another monster, he may be rid of both monsters forever. The monster promises Frankenstein that upon completion of his mate he will leave and never return. There is a chance that the monsters will not keep their promise and stay in Europe, evoking fear into the townsfolk. Frankenstein will not sacrifice his morality because of persuasion from a monster. Even though faced with this tough decision, Frankenstein chooses to destroy the monster for the good of the world. This moral dilemma directly relates to modern scientific issues and controversies. One example is that of genetically modified foods that are at the forefront of scientific advancement at the present day. With an ever-growing population and the problems of world hunger, there has been a high demand for an increased food supply and a better food supply. Technology has been called upon to meet this challenge. The advent of genetically engineered foods, sometimes called transgenic crops or genetically modified foods is not a new concept, but the controversy over it is. Genetically modified foods are foodstuffs produced from genetically modified organisms that have had their genome altered through genetic engineering. No major health hazards have come to light since genetically modified food was introduced 13 years ago. Some Christians object in principle to genetically modified food, as an unacceptable intervention in God’s creation violating barriers in the natural world. Others see the potential for using God’s gift of our technical skills, but with some hesitation, on matters of food safety and environmental risk. Christians believe that all of God’s creatures are much more than their genes. To change one or two genes wouldn’t make an organism less than itself, unless the change itself caused a major disruption. Claims are often made for the potential of genetically modified food to feed the world. If genes could be manipulated to enable staple crops to grow in marginal conditions, it might make a big difference too many countries which struggle to feed themselves. Conducting medical research on humans is a tricky business. It is not the same thing as providing risky but proven medical treatments, which is done for patients. Medical experimentation is done to test subjects in order to further science. The experimenters may hope to help the subjects, but since the procedures are, by definition, not fully tested, they also have potential to cause great suffering and harm. Another form of controversial research testing is animal testing. There are many pros to animal testing. Sometimes it will put an animal through lots of pain, but it can save human lives. Scientists will inject a lab animal with a virus like AIDS or cancer, then try to cure them and if it works, they will have developed a new cure for whatever it was that the animal was injected with. Animal testing can not only save the live of humans, but other animals too. If we did not have medical animal many lives would be lost. Animal testing plays a large role in trying to find cures for certain diseases. Animal testing plays a large role in today’s economy and if we did not have it many people would lose their jobs, and lives. There are also many cons to animal testing. Some are very sad, but it happens anyway. Sometimes it is like wasting the life of an animal. If the animal won’t take up the virus they will kill it just to get rid of it. The people doing this are wasting animal lives, and even if the animal does take up the virus if the people’s cure does not work the animal will still die. Some scholars have used Frankenstein as a central piece in their argument against the development of cloning technology. Others argue that the problem was not with Victor Frankenstein’s scientific methods, but with his responses to his creation; that we should develop cloning technology, but use it wisely. Scientific research and advancement must be approached with a level of caution, responsibility, morals, and ethics. There can be no limitation on science as an exploration of unknown nature. Science is an autonomous value of adventurous humanity. Of course, since there are other autonomous values, the adventure of science may sometimes be tragic, there may be conflict. But we can hope to lessen this conflict if we bear in mind our scientific and ethical responsibilities. First our scientific responsibilities. It is our tradition that research findings must be made public and replicable. Secrecy is unacceptable. Scientific exploration must be free from excessive direction for non-scientific purposes, especially military power, national glory, and business profits. Next our ethical responsibilities. Since in the modern era scientific technology has profound and potentially and actually destructive effects on the environment, human scale, the quality of life, and human freedom, scientists have to take responsibility for the technological applications that they make possible. Cloning is one of the newest scientific advancements that have caused a major stir in the scientific community. Perhaps the most urgent ethical, legal and social issues about cloning arise in the context and process that may lead to the birth of a first human clone. This is so because, as has been pointed out by scholars and politicians, early human experiments are likely to result in a number of clinical failures and lead to miscarriage, the necessity of dozens or even hundreds of abortions, or births of massively deformed offspring. Recent study of mammalian cloning also suggests that a number of defects often created in the reprogramming of the egg do not manifest themselves until later in the life of the resulting clone, so that mature clones have often undergone spectacular, unforeseen deaths. The idea of Frankenstein’s monster is very similar to the idea of cloning in that life is being given to a scientifically created being. Although actual cloning has been limited to animals rather than humans, Frankenstein demonstrates the negative effects that can come from generating life or trying to play the role of god. The debate over cloning will continue as scientific advances further and even newer technologies get introduced. The novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley introduces a dilemma that is relevant to modern day society. Vincent Frankenstein decides to make another ‘ being’ out of human parts and in the end creates a monster. After seeing the result of his first creation he refuses to grant the monsters request for mate to be made. Frankenstein believes that society will be better off without the threat of monsters which may cause widespread harm to others. The Frankenstein novel was published in 1818, but the issues surrounding scientific advancement and scientist’s responsibilities, ethics, and morals are prevalent today. Some examples of modern day scientific controversies are cloning, genetically modified foods, and medical research on both humans and animals. These topics were directly linked to the ideas presented in Frankenstein and remind us that science is not to be taken for granted and should be approached with caution.