The nature vs. nurture argument is the scientific, cultural, and philosophical debate concerning whether human behaviors are caused predominantly by nature or nurture. Nature is described in this debate as genetic or innate behaviors, while nurture is often defined as environment and experiences. Although it is the consensus that an individual is a heterogeneous product of both his genetics and environment, one of the two occasionally plays a larger role in shaping the behaviors and actions of the individual, making it the complicated argument it is. Additionally, depending on how innately ‘good or bad’ the behavioral determinant is, it can either lead to their success or demise. Mary Shelly exemplifies the complicated interactions between nurture debate in her novel, Frankenstein. While Victor Frankenstein and the creature he creates have differences in their natural personalities, the nurture they received was wholly opposite. Victor’s nurture is described as very loving, affectionate and supportive. Victor states that his father “had devoted himself to the education of his children” from a young age (Shelley 19). Victor also adds that “no creature could have more tender parents than [his]” (Shelley 19). He describes his father’s careful attitude when stating, “[He] had taken the greatest precautions that [his] mind should be impressed with supernatural horrors,” such as sciences (Shelley 33). If nurture were the predominating factor, it would seem obvious that he would grow to be a loving, careful man. Victor’s nature, however, seems to contradict the nurture he had received. Victor’s nature drove him to desire an esteemed place in society; leading to a greediness for power, like the power that came before him. Victor describes his family as “one of the most distinguished of that republic” and uses words such as “honour” and “integrity” to describe his bloodline (Shelley 18). Powerful words are used to describe Victor’s overwhelming need for power and control. Moreover, Victor has a natural curiosity about sciences; “I had worked…for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body… I had desired it with ardor that far exceeded moderation,” nurture debate is complicated by a multitude of elements. It is nearly impossible to come to a definitive conclusion when looking at several instances; such as, Victor Frankenstein and Creature in Frankenstein, Equiano in The interesting narrative of Olaudah Equiano, and Babo in Benito Cereno. Each individual is a product of both their nature and nurture; with some being greater influenced by one and it being unclear for others. Understandably, scientists and philosophers are extremely interesting in trying to explain why people are the way they are; scientists sequence whole genomes to find a “bad gene”, psychologists spend decades following individuals to investigate their upbringing and future behaviors and philosophers endlessly try to make sense of the incomprehensible. Frustratingly, with every step forward, we take five steps back from finding the answer to the questions: Is our behaviors driven by our genetic composition or the environment we are surrounded
“I now hasten to the more moving part of my story. I shall relate events that impressed me with feelings which, from what I was, have made me what I am” (Shelley 92). Frankenstein’s Creature presents these lines as it transitions from a being that merely observes its surroundings to something that gains knowledge from the occurrences around it. The Creature learns about humanity from “the perfect forms of [his] cottagers” (90). Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein offers compelling insights into the everlasting nature versus nurture argument. Her husband, Percy Bysshe Shelley wrote, “Treat a person ill, and he will become wicked.” Shelley believes that the nurture of someone, or something, in the Creature’s case, forms them into who they become and what actions they take. While this is true for Frankenstein’s Creature, the same cannot be said about Victor Frankenstein.
American psychologist and well renowned author Jerome Kagan states “Genes and family may determine the foundation of the house, but time and place determine its form.” The topic of nature vs. nurture is highly known to the English literature community and is classified as a major aspect of gothic works. In the novel Frankenstein the author Mary Shelley uses the monster’s constant rejection from society to demonstrate that an individual’s traits are affected more by their environment and their surroundings than by nature.
Mary Shelley put a new outlook on nature versus nurture in human development. By making the monster’s being a blank slate, and morphing his personality based on the different events that shape his life, Shelley clearly states her support for the nurture side.
Shelley addresses Victor’s nature, first. He writes being born “a Genevese” with a family that is “one of the most distinguished of that republic” (Shelly) Victor describes his family with very powerful words including, honor and integrity. Shelly writes more about their place in society and the ability to lead. The Frankenstein family had a very rich history background. Victor could not help but become of his nature. Being in a family such as his, he must uphold a certain standard. Victor had much envy for power. However, the power that he received was too much for him to handle. “I had worked…for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body… I had desired it with ardor that far exceeded moderation,”(Shelly) Victor states. Shelley portrays the idea that Victor is overwhelmed by his newly gained power. The creature woke up something in him that was from is influenc...
The debate of nature versus nurture has been argued for a long period time. The concept of tabula rasa was popularized by John Locke; it stated that babies are born into this world without innate knowledge. Knowledge and personality are developed through experiences and environment, emphasising the nurture in the nature-nurture split. At first blush, Frankenstein avidly supports the theory but in some other parts it does not.
Nature versus Nurture is the name of a long running debate on whether an individual’s behavior is determined by their genes or by how they were raised. John Locke famously held the view that humans had a “blank slate”, which means that human’s personality and character traits are determined by a person’s environment and what they experience. But, many argue against this: for instance, twins are raised similarly, but can have completely different personalities. The real question is this: are people born monsters, or do they become monsters? In Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein and in Oscar Wilde’s novel The Picture of Dorian Gray, both authors provide a clear warning of what makes a monster: society’s superficial nature creates monsters, and
Mary Shelley 's "Frankenstein" is a book with a profound message that touches to the very heart. This message suggests that the reader won 't see the story just from the point of view of the storyteller additionally uncover various concealed assessments and shape an individual translation of the novel. One of its essential proclamations is that nobody is conceived a creature and a "beast" is made all through socialization, and the procedure of socialization begins from the contact with the "maker". It is Victor Frankenstein that couldn 't assume the liability for his animal and was not ready to deal with his "kid". Pride and vanity were the qualities that guided Victor Frankenstein to his revelation of life ".
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
The most frightening horror story can only be called such if it is believable. Nothing is so unnerving as lying awake at night with very real fears. No monster can harm you, unless the monster was genetically engineered by a mad scientist. The theme of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein - scientific investigation without consideration of morality and responsibility - is a very relevant topic in today's world. This theme, along with the less obvious themes of revenge, prejudice against deviation from the norm, and fate all make Frankenstein one of the most unique and terrifying horror novels ever.
Many people may think that if someone were to create life as complex as humans it would beneficial to humans. In the story Frankenstein, Victor creates an intelligent new species of life. This “monster” is rejected by society and seeks revenge on humans and Victor. Throughout Frankenstein, Mary Shelley uses the theme of the creation and destruction of life to illustrate how the creation of life can be a threat to many other lives.
One of the hottest debates is and has been nature vs nurture for years, but what is the difference between the two? Nature is what people think of as already having and not being able to change it, in other words, pre-wiring (Sincero). Nurture is the influence of experiences and its environment of external factors (Sincero). Both nature and nurture play important roles in human development. Scientists and researchers are both trying to figure out which is the main cause in development because it is still unknown on which it is. The best position to side with is nature. Nature is also defined as genetic or hormone based behaviors (Agin). Regardless of the involvement in everyday life, or nurture, this argumentation centers around the effect genes have on human personalities. Although it is understandable on reasons to side with nurture, nature is the better stand in this controversy. Reasons to side with nature is because of genes and what genes hold. Genes is what
“I am malicious because I am miserable.” (P.124) Nature vs Nurture is prevailed all throughout Mary Shelley’s book, Frankenstein. Shelley created the creature as if he was a newborn baby and his personality was shaped by the events that had happened in his life. The creature's environment, good or bad, impacted his personality as well as the lack of love, and a combination of isolation and hatred, led the creature to turn towards a path of destruction.
Nature vs. Nurture is one of the world's oldest psychological debates that questions whether your environment or how you were raised or treated impact on someone's development, like how someone behaves, their intelligence and personality. In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein were going to look at which nature or nurture had more effect on the characters in this novel. I believe that nurture had the strongest impact on the characters. You should always think about how your actions are going to have an impact on those around you. ” The fatal impulse that has lead to my ruin” (Shelley 21).Victor became so obsessed with creating this creature that he didn’t think about the outcome of how he was going to feel once the monster was created.
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
Throughout the history of human existence, there have always been questions that have plagued man for centuries. Some of these questions are “what is the meaning of life” and “which came first, the chicken or the egg”. Within the past 400 years a new question has surfaced which takes our minds to much further levels. The question asked is whether nature or nurture has more of an impact on the growing development of people. It is a fact that a combination of nature and nurture play important roles in how humans behave socially. However, I believe that nature has a more domineering role in the development of how people behave in society with regards to sexual orientation, crimes and violence and mental disorders.