Who Is Victor Responsible In Frankenstein

However, Munthe makes a huge logical flaw that can disprove his entire argument. Munthe assumes that the “imperfect information” leads to the inability for one to make a moral judgement of said decisions. Nevertheless, despite not having perfect information, there is still enough information for a reasonable individual to make predictions of probable or potential outcomes. Just because there is not enough information to make a perfect decision, does not mean that you must remain ignorant of potential outcomes. Simply put, you can base moral judgements off one’s ability to foresee potential consequences and use these predictions to make the best decision moving forward. You simply cannot base morality off ignorance and lack of consideration

for predictable outcomes. For example, during the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, many proponents of the pipeline argued that since there is not enough information to prove that there is a threat to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s water supply via oil spills, then it is ethical to build the pipeline. Just because there is not enough certain evidence to prove a spill will occur, does not mean that it is moral to be ignorant of such consequences. By early 2018, there were five spills due to such ignorance (Brown). Is ignoring negative consequences simply because you aren’t certain moral? Is ignorance of information an easy enough defense to prove a given action cannot be morally judged? It would appear not so.
For Frankenstein, his creation is immoral because he failed to consider the consequences of his actions.

Victor was so caught up in his science that he failed to consider that he is creating a monster. Consequently, just because he was ignorant of what he was doing does not alleviate him from all moral responsibility of his actions. In order to be morally responsible, he should have considered that if he succeed, his Monster would be marginalized due to his horrendous looks. Frankenstein never considered what he would do with his creation after it became alive, let alone make him look like he would fit into society. Even Frankenstein realized the immorality of his experiments via the guilt-ridden sicknesses and endless remorse he feels throughout the novel. Victor knew that he was morally responsible, if he didn’t, he would not feel remorse or guilty every time someone he loves

dies.
In our modern society, many innovators are making the same mistakes Victor Frankenstein makes by meddling in scientific areas that can impact our society in hugely negative ways. One such modern technological advancement that society should be more critical about is artificial intelligence, or AI for short, and machine learning. Ambitiously, many scientists and technological innovators are entering the AI industry due to its supposed benefits. Such benefits include: improved efficiency, decreased human error, increased supply for services, enhanced lifestyles, and improved effectiveness in solving complex geopolitical issues. Because AI has the capacity to self-learn and continually improve with increased amounts of data and information, over time, AI could potentially help progress our society past many of our modern-day issues. However, blinded by their own ambition, the scientists of today are creating such technologies without taking into consideration the many potential dangers that could occur in order to achieve a scientific discovery.
As AI capabilities become increasingly more complex and powerful, there are many dangers that could arise. First off, because AI can be highly automated, such technologies pose a huge risk to our cyber security systems, according to a multi-organizational report on the dangers of AI. Due to AI efficiency, phishing attacks, where mass amounts of individuals are sent personalized requests in order to extract highly personal information, can be easily conducted without the human labor it previously required. Moreover, AI will have the capacity to be able to impersonate individuals via speech synthesis programs and steal personal identities. Furthermore, because AI systems have the capacity to self-learn, they can find ways to exploit software vulnerabilities and automate hacking services (Malicious AI Report).
Not only does AI pose a massive digital threat, but also poses a huge geopolitical threat that can threaten our physical or political security.

AI can be used “to automate tasks involved in carrying out attacks with drones and other physical systems” (Malicious 6). In fact, such automated physical systems, like self-driving cars, can be prone to buggy errors and crashes that can lead to crashes and innocent people to be killed. Just earlier this year, Tesla’s self-driving car hit an innocent bystander after it failed to stop due to a fatal systems error (Vlasic). Additionally, AI systems can more efficiently be used by corporations or governments to mass-collect data in order to promote propaganda campaigns and commit mass deception for the public. Such concerns about AI assisted mass-surveillance “undermine the ability of democracies to sustain truthful public debates” (Malicious 6). Recently, such AI assisted surveillance made huge news when Cambridge Analytica “acquired access to private data on millions of Facebook users”; therefore, Cambridge Analytica was able to “offer tools that could identify the personalities of American voters and influence their behavior” on the popular social media website, Facebook. Cambridge Analytica, funded by wealthy Republican donors and was hired by President Trump’s campaign, was able to use AI assisted technologies to collect important data in order to influence the American public to vote for Republican candidates

(Granville).
The question stands, were the creators of such AI technologies, namely Tesla and Facebook, morally responsible for such atrocities that occurred using their technologies? Although highly controversial, many support the claim that the creators of such AI systems should have been aware of such negative consequences and atrocities that could occur; therefore, they must be morally responsible for the atrocities. Many of these Silicon Valley companies are so highly driven to innovate that they fail to consider the potential negative ramifications of such innovations. If not careful, many of these companies, just like Victor Frankenstein, can be so blinded by their ambitions that they become ignorant of potentially huge negative ramifications. Just because a business intends for their technologies to be beneficial to society, it does not mean that they should be alleviated from the moral responsibility of its consequences. As seen in Frankenstein and in our modern society via AI systems controversies, ignorance is not a defense for moral responsibility; therefore, the precautionary principle should be applied when it comes to scientific innovations.