The Hubris of Dr Frankenstein and Reproductive Cloning

Frankenstein, written by Mary Shelley in 1818, is asHe was only focused on the task he had set himself.
compelling and thought-provoking in 2010 as whenHe gave no thought to what such a creature would
the novel appeared almost 200 years ago. Shelleythink or how it would act. He certainly never
subtitled her opus The Modern Prometheus. Dr. Victorconsidered potential consequences to others that
Frankenstein, although certainly no god, was a brilliantwould flow from the existence of such a creation.
scientist who paid bitterly for the fruits of his genius.Opponents of reproductive cloning often draw
His loved ones were tragically murdered by hisunflattering parallels to the story of Frankenstein and
inhuman creation and he was doomed to sufferhis monster. There are some things scientists should
relentlessly for his deeds, as was Prometheus. Thenever consider and some actions scientists should
Titan Prometheus believed he was helping mankindnever take, they say. It is suggested that creating
by giving them the gift of fire. Frankenstein believedlife - which is exactly what reproductive cloning would
he was furthering the cause of science by creating abe, if successful - is the ultimate act of hubris.
living being from dead flesh. Prometheus andFrankenstein provides fictional evidence of this. Dr.
Frankenstein shared the classical tragic flaw of hubris.Frankenstein took it upon himself to create life, and
Hubris is the arrogance that leads one tohis family and friends were the ones to pay the
overestimate one's abilities and importance and taketerrible cost of his actions in the loss of their own
actions that likely result in great harms. In Greeklives.
literature a person's hubris usually helped cause hisThose opposed to RC suggest that creating life
destruction.should not be undertaken by scientists. But this is not
Dr. Frankenstein successfully created new life. Thea consistent position. Many of these persons do not
monster was a genius, but his physical qualities werealso oppose in vitro fertilization or other assisted
abhorrent to others and he was shunned. The beingreproductive technologies. All fertilizations which occur
recognized his unfortunate uniqueness and wasin laboratories - using instruments, petri dishes, and
greatly pained by his enforced solitude. He wreakedrefrigerators - are examples of scientists creating life.
terrible vengeance upon Frankenstein for theIt is not at all clear why one form of creation is
perceived crime of bringing the creature into theacceptable and even sought after in certain
world.circumstances and another is deemed reprehensible
One possible conclusion from Shelley's cautionary taleand a crime against nature.
is that science should never proceed unchecked.Creating life may not be the major issue in
Science needs always to be constrained by moralreproductive cloning. But as individual members of
principles and its activities need to be referencedsociety, we all need to guard against hubris and its
against potential harms. Frankenstein's hubris blindedconsequences.
him to the likely untoward outcomes of his research.