Philosophical Reviews: Frankenstein

 

Victor Frankenstein and his creature is a source of a very interesting philosophical debate.

It's clear that the creature becomes a monster thanks to a lack of good,  but neither his father and the society were unable to fill the gap. This is due to fear of the stranger, from selfishness, pleasure in evil and so on.

Let's try to change the narration, the creature was always loved by his father and accepted by society who gave him a clear identity.

Despite everything he is a monster and a killer, who loves to spread evil, why hasn't there been a reversal of trend?

In my opinion the real problem is not the lack of good but the inability of human beings to understand the real good for the creature, so to give him the right good, can it prevent him from becoming a monster?

Frankenstein is a classic example to show that we aren't completely free, our behavior is influenced by the society, from which good and evil emerge.

Victor survived thanks to evil, which gave him the strength to move forward, annihilating his remorse.

In conclusion we are fascinated by evil that is attenuated by good.