The Age Of Enlightenment In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

1286 Words3 Pages

The Age of Enlightenment emphasized reason over tradition in order to challenge religious views and to advance knowledge of scientific thinking. Reason is what differentiates humans from animals by allowing them to think about circumstances rationally rather than strictly by instinct. Jean-Jacques Rousseau embodies the enlightenment ideals of introducing reason into everyday lives in his book A Discourse on Inequality by saying that early humans’ creation and use of language shows how reason is used in a way to challenge ideas to imagine better solutions. This way of showing that early humans used reason is both extended from and challenged in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. This text also uses language as a way to utilize reason but does so in a way that shows the use of reason in a positive and negative light, supporting and contradicting the theory shown by Rousseau and that of the Age of Enlightenment.
Rousseau believes that early humans did not innately have or use reason but were only aware of instinct and basic feelings such as hunger, thirst, and light. He states that “man’s first feeling was that of his existence, his first concern was that of self-preservation,” (Rousseau, 109). The early man, knowing of his existence, knows only what to do and how to survive because of his instinct which is innately in every living creature. Instinct tells living creature to survive; that is do whatever it takes to preserve oneself. The early man spends time thinking about and doing only those things necessary to his survival leaving no time to ponder why they are doing what they are doing. This leads to a society that is stagnating and has no reason/thoughts that challenge their own and others motives. Shelley extends from and supports ...

... middle of paper ...

...so point out that through the expansion of language there is a greater need and use of reason amongst humans. Shelley challenges the enlightenment idea of reason by pointing out that even if people are using reason with a clear mindset, which is a mindset that is not overly focused on a single goal, other people can manipulate the use of reason to get the goal that they want without it being a reasonable goal. This complicates traditional views of using reason to know when to trust others and when not to trust others. If a person is a perfectly reasonable person with a clear mindset and they think that something someone else tells them or shows them is a reasonable thing, they may still come to the wrong conclusion if they are given false information. This brings up the ultimate question that even if we are reasonable people, can we really trust anything or anyone?

Open Document