Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sushan]

This topic is about the September 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, The Not So Great American Novel by James E Doucette

I asked Sarah if she understood Dr. Frankenstein’s dilemma: “How do you get the monster back on the table?”

(Page 8 - Kindle version)


In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein. This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context, etc.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

[LuckyR]

This topic is about the September 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, The Not So Great American Novel by James E Doucette

I asked Sarah if she understood Dr. Frankenstein’s dilemma: “How do you get the monster back on the table?”

(Page 8 - Kindle version)


In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein. This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context, etc.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

You didn't mention the most common revolt, namely that of teenagers against their parents. Especially since that is the most obvious analogy between the monster and the doctor.

[stevie]

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

Due to the impulsiveness of uneducated self. So it's a matter of age, too.

[Sushan]

This topic is about the September 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, The Not So Great American Novel by James E Doucette

I asked Sarah if she understood Dr. Frankenstein’s dilemma: “How do you get the monster back on the table?”

(Page 8 - Kindle version)


In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein. This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context, etc.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

You didn't mention the most common revolt, namely that of teenagers against their parents. Especially since that is the most obvious analogy between the monster and the doctor.

I think revolting of teenagers against parents comes in a different context. It occurs due to the clash of the interests of the two parties. The part in which the creation trying to be good in the creator's eyes is not found in this particular scenario. Instead the creation thinks that he/she is correct and knows better than the creator.

[Sushan]

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

Due to the impulsiveness of uneducated self. So it's a matter of age, too.

Quite true. That is why this revolting occurs often in younger ages compared to old age. The education and experience is necessary for the creation to understand its position. But on the other hand, does this mean that the creation cannot be innovative as it is a quality of the creator?

[LuckyR]

This topic is about the September 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, The Not So Great American Novel by James E Doucette

I asked Sarah if she understood Dr. Frankenstein’s dilemma: “How do you get the monster back on the table?”

(Page 8 - Kindle version)


In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein. This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context, etc.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

You didn't mention the most common revolt, namely that of teenagers against their parents. Especially since that is the most obvious analogy between the monster and the doctor.

I think revolting of teenagers against parents comes in a different context. It occurs due to the clash of the interests of the two parties. The part in which the creation trying to be good in the creator's eyes is not found in this particular scenario. Instead the creation thinks that he/she is correct and knows better than the creator.

Uummm... do you have teenagers?

[stevie]

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

Due to the impulsiveness of uneducated self. So it's a matter of age, too.

Quite true. That is why this revolting occurs often in younger ages compared to old age. The education and experience is necessary for the creation to understand its position. But on the other hand, does this mean that the creation cannot be innovative as it is a quality of the creator?

Humans are basically conditioned and - depending on conditioning education in the context of basic condition - may have the capacity to some degree to condition themselves which opens the door to own creativity.

[Belindi]

Revolt against God is usually caused by the problem of evil. The poor monster began life as a loving trusting being but learned he was an outcast. Frankenstein's monster was an individual at a time when the Romantics such as Mary Shelley were pitted against the establishment.

The idea being that if people were repressed and oppressed they would suffer as individual psyches and eventually society would suffer.

[robinkyle11]

In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein.

This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand.Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience as necessary towards the creator.

[Belindi]

In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein.

This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand.Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience as necessary towards the creator.

It's because of identifiable historical events especially the large changes brought about by the agricultural and industrial revolutions. These events brought the creator , the established cultures, into disarray as workers became displaced from their traditional communities and in the commercialised communities they replaced the established church or established ethnicity with dissenting models, chaos, or atheism.

During intervening centuries , revolutions and religions have not stopped commercialised greed. Worldwide simultaneous pestilences, fires, and floods will stop the bolting horses market forces and nationalism.

[Good_Egg]

Many people don't condone slavery. We see the status of a slave as sub-human - that to exist for the purpose of taking orders from others with no opportunity to pursue one's own ends is to be something less than fully human.

The difference between the slave and the servant is that the servant can walk away. The servant has agency, making an ongoing choice to trade his service for things he wants. It is the permanence of the slave's condition which is agency-denying and thus objectionable.

A creator's demand for obedience from his creation thus becomes tyrannical when it becomes permanent (or lifelong, which amounts to the same thing). The child with a clear vision of their imminent pathway to autonomous adulthood does not justly rebel.

But monsterhood is permanent...

[Sushan]

This topic is about the September 2022 Philosophy Book of the Month, The Not So Great American Novel by James E Doucette



(Page 8 - Kindle version)


In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein. This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context, etc.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

You didn't mention the most common revolt, namely that of teenagers against their parents. Especially since that is the most obvious analogy between the monster and the doctor.

I think revolting of teenagers against parents comes in a different context. It occurs due to the clash of the interests of the two parties. The part in which the creation trying to be good in the creator's eyes is not found in this particular scenario. Instead the creation thinks that he/she is correct and knows better than the creator.

Uummm... do you have teenagers?

Not yet. But I have the first hand experience of being a teenager several years back. When I think about how I thought and acted those days facing mixed consequences at the end, I have acted exactly as I explained above.

[Sushan]

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand. Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience (as necessary) towards the creator?

Due to the impulsiveness of uneducated self. So it's a matter of age, too.

Quite true. That is why this revolting occurs often in younger ages compared to old age. The education and experience is necessary for the creation to understand its position. But on the other hand, does this mean that the creation cannot be innovative as it is a quality of the creator?

Humans are basically conditioned and - depending on conditioning education in the context of basic condition - may have the capacity to some degree to condition themselves which opens the door to own creativity.

Then what about the many innovators that we have seen in the history and seeing today as well? Have they and do they possess only a limited (or hindered by conditioning) amount of creativity? Could we have achieved more if there was no conditioning at all?

[Sushan]

Revolt against God is usually caused by the problem of evil. The poor monster began life as a loving trusting being but learned he was an outcast. Frankenstein's monster was an individual at a time when the Romantics such as Mary Shelley were pitted against the establishment.

The idea being that if people were repressed and oppressed they would suffer as individual psyches and eventually society would suffer.

I can agree with all your ideas from the second sentence onwards. But from where does the 'evil' come into this picture? I see it as an social issue rather than being a moral or a spiritual one.

[Sushan]

In the novel written by Mary Shelley, the monster first tries to be good in his creator's eyes. But when he is dismissed by his creator, he revolts against the creator, Dr. Frankenstein.

This revolting against the creator is seen in many contexts, including revolting against the God in religious context, revolting against the father in family context, revolting against 'selfdom' in social context.

We all are creators of something from one hand, while being creations of something else from the other hand.Why do we see this tendency of revolting against the creator more often, without giving the respect and showing the obedience as necessary towards the creator.

It seems like you have quoted a part of the description under the discussion topic, and due to some reason have been unable to add your own ideas. We would love to see your own thoughts regarding the matter. Thank you for commenting and your participation is much appreciated.