Natural Learning

In the novel Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, Victor Frankenstein and his creation, the “monster”, have had a comparable upbringing in terms of the way they became educated.

Victor went through the usual schooling everyone in society goes through.Due to his academic achievements, he was able to attend a prestigious university where he studied science. “I attended the lectures and cultivated the acquaintance of the men of science of the university, and I found even in M. Krempe a great deal of sound sense and real information, combined, it is true, with a repulsive physiognomy and manners, but not on that account the less valuable.” His motivation to learn as much as possible caused him to become unsocial and caused a rift between him and his family. He was very interested on how humans were created and how they die. After years of research and experimentation, he was able to create a creature. After realizing how ugly his creation was, he abandoned it and all his studies. 

Through Victor’s socially normal education, he was able to become a very smart person. However, his knowledge caused him to create a being he could not look after. Therefore, he created a living and breathing being that has to spend the rest of his life miserably. 

The monster, on the other hand, learned what he learned through observing nature. He had neither any formal school nor guidance. Through his experiences living outside by himself, he learned what he needed to about the world; such as what hot and cold feel like. He learned the basics of knowledge by eavesdropping on his neighbors’ conversations. 

He then tried to interact with his neighbor and show off his knowledge. However, the neighbor did not react very well and attacked the monster. This fueled the monsters hatred towards humans and that is when he started to kill people.

The novel supports the expression that “knowledge is power”, however, having too much knowledge or too much power can be very dangerous and cause serious complications. 

Everything is connected.

I will be focusing on Descartes’ theory that certain situations bring upon other situations which effect one’s perception on life.  “I will not hesitate, however, to avow my belief that it has been my singular good fortune to have early in life fallen in with certain tracks which have conducted me to consideration and maxims that gives me the means, as I think…” ( part 1, 3rd paragraph) Descartes is saying that because of a series of events that have happened in his life, he was put on a path . He is satisfied with his choice, that it has led him to questioning things and to bring about new interests.

“…as I think, of gradually augmenting my knowledge, and of raising it by little and little to the highest point which the mediocrity of my talents and the brief duration of my life will permit me to reach.”  (part1, 3 paragraph)  Because of his new discoveries,  it brought about a want to expand his knowledge to the fullest. He was relieved to be on the path of hunger and passion.

Descartes goes on a journey as well as Frankenstein goes on his own. It all begins with his father giving  him a dull negative comment on an interest of his. If his father could have given him a good reason  to not read the works of Agrippa he would of tossed it. Instead it made Frankenstein extremely curious and motivated him to keep learning about many different ideas in the science world. From there, another impact in his life was the thunderstorm him and his family went through. After the storm a tree in their backyard was destroyed. “…and nothing remain but a blasted stump.”  (ch.2) This brought about a man of great research in natural philosophy. He studied the tree to end up with a few theories for lighting. Victor was fascinated and after many other little events, it all led him to the university of Ingolstadt. At this school he begins to learn many useful things that lead him to his destiny. He made a promise to himself that he would make this project his occupation. Frankenstein loves his path so far and wants to soak up as much education he can to build his dream. His determination pays off and it seams like he has reached his peak of brilliance because the monster comes alive. He reached the stars and in a quick second he is disgusted by it.  Descartes talks about how everyone chooses a path that benefits their skills. Frankenstein would agree with Descartes but then mention that it is dangerous because you don’t know how much power you possess. After knowledge is power.

“Thus ended  a day memorable to me: it decided my future destiny.” (ch. 3) Descartes says that everyone has events that shape and shift their lives. It leads them to were they are meant to be. He was satisfied with his. I’m not so sure he would say the same for Victor.  Victor has brought even more questions now because of his creation. His dream has changed his perception once again. It is actually never ending. That is why Descartes is content with his journey because others have a more complicated path.

 

Frankenstein #2

The education of both Victor Frankenstein and the Monster can be compared to the argument of nature vs. nurture in Rosseau’s “Emile.” Victor’s self-education plays a critical role in shaping Victor Frankenstein’s monster. Frankenstein’s education was from reading many scientific textbooks, mainly scientific in nature. This can be related to Rosseau’s theory of educating oneself. The Monster has been neglected and has been shown no love. Since he has been abandoned by Frankenstein, he is forced to educate himself in both survival and life. Everything the Monster learns is through his own experiences; there is no one to teach him what to do. This relates to individualism and the idea that parents shouldn’t tell their children what to do, just encourage them to make their own decisions. The Monster uses all experiences around him to learn how to communicate and love. Loneliness and isolation both play a large part in the Monster’s actions. Victor Frankenstein has caused him so much suffering and therefore he cannot accept himself because he wasn’t given any parenting, education or love by his creator.

 

Learn from Nature

Rousseau had stated that, “All that we lack at birth, all that we need when we come to man’s estate, is the gift of education. This education comes to us from nature, from men, or from things”(Rousseau; 1), this means that school isn’t the only way of learning and educating yourself, but nature also teaches you many things. He makes a point trying to tell us that nature allows us to educate ourselves through experience, without someone having to tell us. This can be seen in Frankenstein written by Mary Shelley in chapter 11. It states, “It was dark when I awoke; I felt cold also, and half frightened, as it were, instinctively, finding myself so desolate. Before I had quitted your apartment, on a sensation of cold, I had covered myself with some clothes, but these were insufficient to secure me from the dews of night. I was a poor, helpless, miserable wretch; I knew, and could distinguish, nothing; but feeling pain invade me on all sides, I sat down and wept” (Shelby, Chapter 11), this shows that no one told him that he had to wear extra clothes because of the cold, but he himself realized through experience that the amount of clothes he wore wasn’t sufficient enough. This proves Rousseau theory that not everything is taught in school, but you learn through experience. Another incident he describes is when he burned his hands. “One day, when I was oppressed by cold, I found a fire which had been left by some wandering beggars, and was overcome with delight at the warmth I experienced from it. “In my joy I thrust my hand into the live embers, but quickly drew it out again with a cry of pain” (Shelby, Chapter 11), this also shows that he learned that fire is dangerous because it can burn you and cause pain. He moved his hands away right away without anyone having to tell him and that shows he learned himself. He wasn’t taught that by anyone, but he learned it on his own through his experiences. The experiences in Frankenstein support Rousseau’s theory of learning from nature through experiences.

Education without Man

In the beginning of Emile,  Rousseau writes:

“We are born weak, we need strength; helpless, we need aid; foolish, we need reason. All that we lack at birth, all that we need when we come to man’s estate, is the gift of education. This education comes to us from nature, from men, or from things. The inner growth of our organs and faculties is the education of nature, the use we learn to make of this growth is the education of men, what we gain by our experience of our surroundings is the education of things” (1).

At birth we are small and weak, incapable of doing nearly anything for ourselves. The  only thing that helps us grow is education. Education is what makes it possible for us to grow not just in size but in intellect.

In Frankenstein, we see two examples of what happens when a subject receives too much of one certain type of education. Rousseau says that “education come to us from nature, from men, or from things… If their teaching conflicts, the scholar is ill-educated and will never be at peace with himself. ”

In Dr. Frankenstein, we see a man who is increasingly influenced by the education of man and his knowledge of the nature around him. “From this day natural philosophy, and particularly chemistry, in the most comprehensive sense of the term, became nearly my sole occupation (Frankenstein Vol. I, Ch III).”

Dr. Frankenstein’s obsession with the knowledge of nature through the education of man created an imbalance in hi education which resulted in his abnormal plans to create and eventually bring to life a creature against the norms of nature.

As Rousseau writes, “God makes all things good; man meddles with them and they become evil. He forces one soil to yield the products of another, one tree to bear another’s fruit (1). ” BY creating the monster, Dr. Frankenstein clearly goes against the norms of nature and against the education of nature by giving the monster limbs and organs that did not grow for his creation. As we can see here, from the beginning, the monster was destined to failure because his education through nature was manipulated right from the beginning. Although he did live most of his time out in the wild, he was unable to attain a proper education by man due to his abnormalities. Yes, its true that he was able to learn to speak and read like us, but because he lacked human interaction, he was unable to  know what to do with the emotions within himself.

Frankenstein

In last week’s reading of Emile, a major premise of Rousseau’s was that there are three “masters” of education. That of man, nature and things. He expressed that these three masters work best when in conjunction with one another. “Since all three modes of education must work together, the two that we can control must follow the lead of that which is beyond our control” (p.1). The “uncontrollable” mode of education Rousseau is referring to is that of nature. It was interesting to see his ideologies supported in such a fascinating story like that of Frankenstein.

In Emile, Rousseau goes on to describe infancy. He states, ”We are born weak, we need strength; helpless, we need aid; foolish, we need reason. All that we lack at birth, all that we need when we come to man’s estate, is the gift of education”(p.1). While not technically an infant, nor physically weak, Frankenstein’s monster might be regarded as such. In chapter 11, we begin to get insight on how he (meaning the monster) learns and navigates through the world. Born with no innate knowledge the monster must experience things and derive conclusions based of his own experiences. “… until I felt tormented by hunger and thirst. This roused me from my nearly dormant state, and I ate some berries which I found hanging on the trees or lying on the ground (11).” Naturally the monster experienced hunger and was able to conclude that eating satisfies that hunger. Through experience, the monster was also able to conclude that fire is not to be touched and that going to sleep when he’s tired, were practical solutions to very natural occurrences.

 Another of the three masters of education is that of men. Seeing as Frankenstein didn’t send his monster off to college, the education of man (in this instance) is solely observed knowledge from those around him. Through education of men, he learned basic communication skills. The monster goes on to say ,”While I improved in speech, I also learned the science of letters as it was taught to the stranger, and this opened before me a wide field for wonder and delight”(12). It was through his experiences with nature, things and men that he learned how to function in the world. I believe that the story of Frankenstein greatly illustrates many aspects of Emile.

 

Learning Through Experience

In Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein: The Modern Prometheus, the theory of learning through experience is portrayed. Frankenstein portrays the life of a monster that is created by Victor Frankenstein from the day it comes to life. Victor Frankenstein becomes interested in the creation of life, and begins to study anatomy and death. “To examine the causes of life, we must first have recourse to death. I became acquainted with the science of anatomy, but this was not sufficient; I must also observe the natural decay and corruption of the human body. (Shelly Chapter 4).

When Frankenstein’s monster came to life, it was basically like being an infant; not knowing basics of life. “My eyes became accustomed to the light and to perceive objects in their right forms; I distinguished the insect from the herb, and by degrees, one herb from another. I found that the sparrow uttered none but harsh notes, whilst those of the blackbird and thrush were sweet and enticing.” (Shelly Chapter 11). The monster had taught himself the difference between insects and herbs, and then he taught himself the differences between different herbs.

“In my joy I thrust my hand into the live embers, but quickly drew it out again with a cry of pain. How strange, I thought, that the same cause should produce such opposite effects! I examined the materials of the fire, and to my joy found it to be composed of wood. I quickly collected some branches, but they were wet and would not burn. I was pained at this and sat still watching the operation of the fire. The wet wood which I had placed near the heat dried and itself became inflamed. (Shelly Chapter 11). While searching for shelter and warmth, the monster discovers a fire. Not knowing anything about fire, he feels the heat coming from it. He places his hand into the fire, and is burned by it. From now experiencing the pain as a result of touching the fire, the monster now learns not to touch fire. The monster also learns that the wet wood will not burn, but dry wood will.

 

Knowledge: good and bad

Both Emile and Frankenstein discuss citizen making, and knowledge plays a major role. The main argument in Emile is the best education is let a child have complete freedom of what he wishes to learn. Frankenstein shows the pros and cons of this method.

Rousseau concedes that he only has claim over Emile when he is dependent on him. Rousseau says “The child has not this idea, so he stretches out his hand to seize the object within his reach or that which is a hundred paces from him” (4). This is an example of when a child needs a caregiver.

In Frankenstein, Victor literally made a man, only that he is a monster. Victor admires science so much that he is insatiable of it and creates a person from scratch. He knows that science can be destructive when he witnesses “the dazzling light vanished, the oak had disappeared, and nothing remained but a blasted stump… the tree shattered in a singular manner. It was not splintered by the shock, but entirely reduced to thin ribbons of wood. I never beheld anything so utterly destroyed” (Shelly, ch.2, par.9). Shelly demonstrates a man with great knowledge sees how destructive nature can be yet doesn’t realize how his knowledge can create a huge mistake.

Rousseau’s theory mirrors Shelley’s development of the Monster. The Monster is a like an infant when he comes to this world; he is what his experiences make of him.

Shelly shows the Monster learns through his senses that fire “were wet and would not burn” (ch.11, par.6), “fire gave light as well as heat” (ch.11, par.7) and touching it will result in “a cry of pain” (ch.11, par.6). Furthermore, the Monster says “I found that the youth spent a great part of each day in collecting wood for the family fire, and during the night I often took his tools, the use of which I quickly discovered, and brought home firing sufficient for the consumption of several days” (Shelly, ch.12, par.7). From these experiences, he gains knowledge from observations, which is the “education from things” according to Emile.  On the other hand, when the Monster “learned the science of letters” (Shelly, ch.13, par.13), he understands the world better but also realized that he is unfit in the society.  His disappointment and resentment fueled the thought of revenge. Here knowledge serves as the driving engine of danger.

Locke Rousseau and Mary Shelley

 

Although every philosopher has his or her own ideas and views, Locke and Rousseau seem to influence Shelley in her novel Frankenstein. Locke is a philosopher who has a concept known as tabula rasa, which literally means blank sheet of paper, which he really means that people aren’t born with innate ideas. Infants must learn from an educator and as the person grows up he/she will fill that empty brain with knowledge. He stresses on the fact that experience is everything in terms of education.

 

Locke’s theory of “tabula rasa” inspires Shelley’s development of Frankenstein’s creature. A creature that is empty-minded must educate itself through experiences it encounters throughout its aimless journey through an unknown place. Ultimately the creature develops feelings such as empathy and regret as we saw when the creature met the poor family, and when the creature committed murder.

 

 

Rousseau says unlike Locke that humans are blank slates but rather that they come into the world with compassion and self-preservation, and the rest of their education needs to be learned through man, nature and things (experiences). Therefore he believes that humans by nature have the potential to do well and be good. The only thing that hinders people from innocence is the influence others have that can corrupt them.

We can see Rousseau’s admiration and agreement with Shelley in a way through his work, Emile.

Emile is a novel broken down into multiple parts in which a tutor educates a young orphan. It goes through the different ages of a person and how to educate each age group through nature, man and/or things.

This novel is similar to Frankenstein since they both encompass the development of an individual through education of a mentor- what Rousseau believes to be what makes the ideal person. Based on this, we can infer that according to Rousseau the monster was only a monster because it wasn’t given a proper mentor to educate it.

 

Here we see the role of an educator as an extremely important aspect of ones education. We can now go back and take a look at Frankenstein’s creature. It had been rejected and abandoned by its creator, the one who is supposed to love you the most and show the most compassion and guidance. The creature is described as a “noble savage” at first and is then later labeled as a malevolent monster. The creature had no educator to guide its development and structure its manners toward itself and others. But Frankenstein had a totally opposite education. His educators were scientists that were foolish which led to his messed up perspective. We learn that it is also important to educate with scrutiny as to not mess up the student.

 

 

 

Danger in Knowledge

In our precious reading, “Discourse of Method”, Rene Descartes points out that education is a process that will answer your questions and remove your doubts. Descartes also believes education would lead to a certain truth. In part three of his discourse, Descartes states “I was successful enough; for, since I endeavoured to discover the falsehood or incertitude of the propositions I examined, not by feeble conjectures, but by clear and certain reasonings, I met with nothing so doubtful as not to yield some conclusion of adequate certainty”(3). Descartes explores the world to find the necessary knowledge to answer his questions He thinks the education he gained from his traveling and experience can clear his mind and provide him with the certainty that he is eager for. In Descartes’s point of view, knowledge is a good thing.

However, in this week’s reading, Frankenstein by Mary Shelly, Victor Frankenstein has different views about knowledge. Quite opposite to Descartes, he thinks knowledge is a dangerous thing. In the beginning of the book, Victor believes science is the only route to find truth. “In other studies you go as far as others have gone before you, and there is nothing more to know; but in a scientific pursuit there is continual food for discovery and wonder”(4). However, as he digs deeper and deeper into his subject, he is so fascinated and he attempts to go beyond the human limit and he find out the secret of life. Victor’s thirst for knowledge drives him to create the monster with strength and intelligence. However, he is too late to realize where his pursuit of knowledge has brought him. The monster ends up murder his family and destroys the things he valued. Victor finally realizes what he has done results in deathly consequences and is dangerous.

In addition, Victor Frankenstein’s monster challenges Descartes’s ideology by presenting  the danger of knowledge. The monster lives in an isolated environment after he vanished. He doesn’t know anything about the human world and he doesn’t realize that he is unnatural. Starting with no knowledge at all, the monster learns to keep warm and find food to eat as he’s exploring the nature. The monster learns to speak the human language by listening to his neighbors and tries to understand them by their gesture. As the monster knows more about the human culture and sensation, he wants to learn more about it and he wants to be like human. “Of what a strange nature is knowledge! It clings to the mind when it has once seized on it like a lichen on the rock”(13). The monster urges to learn more about the human world; the more knowledge he has, and the more he wants to become a human being. However, even though he tries so hard to attain knowledge, he can’t escape from his fate of being a monster.

A Blogs@Baruch site