Analysis Of Ethics In The Birthmark By Nathaniel Hawthorne

Even though it is ethical to remove the birthmark for the couple’s culture since it will resolve their looming problem, is it moral in their perspective? Initially, it was implied that Georgina found it wrong to remove it since she first believed the mark as a “charm” (419) but the soon changed when Aylmer believed the opposite of it. Aylmer has always found it morally correct in his eyes that the removal of the birthmark is a need since he only ever saw it as a scorching stigma that derails him from reaching total happiness and bliss. The wrong becomes right and the right becomes wrong, and together, these events led to the ethical extermination of the birthmark. Earlier, the two main characters have been paralleled to Nous and Hyle, but

Often, morality becomes perverse when ethics is involved depending on the situation. Even though it is right for a certain group, it does not mean it’s always right elsewhere. Different levels of vanity differ in various types of marriages that make it hard to put a generalization on it. Conflicts arise due to opposing thoughts and opposing morals that is why ethics can’t ever be defined clearly. In The Birth-Mark, Hawthorne challenged the thin line between ethics and morals by focusing on vanity in marriage. He generated strong characters that were perfect for each other and paralleled them not only to Nous vs. Hyle, but also to Science vs. Nature. Ethics and morals are connected just like Georgiana and the birthmark were connected. Morality is “in the heart now” of ethics (420). No matter how much you try to get it out, it will always be an attached defining factor of it. Even though ethics failed the husband and wife in the novel, their love, even though a little skewed, for each other made their marriage an actual success in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health, until death did them