Is Frankenstein's creature considered a human?

Answer 1

No...I think that it has always been considered a monster.
Remember Igor dropped the brain that he was sent after and grabbed a murderers instead. Also, the entire theme is basically that Man should not try to take the role of God or for those that don't believe in God...Man should not mess with mother nature.

There are serial killers that are men who are considered monsters because of some of there in-human acts of cruelty against man, woman, and child.

Answer 2

It depends on what criteria you use to define "human."
If 'human' is used as an adjective, then he is indeed human, as he exhibits human characteristics. But your question is using 'human' as a noun, which is tougher to figure out and depends entirely on your own decisions.
He has human body parts and the physical appearance of a human, and also exhibits all human traits (albeit they might be infantile in development). Let's say I take various metals, plastics, heat-resistant plating, and other parts--straight from NASA--and assemble them into the form of a space shuttle--using a NASA Space Shuttle Assembly Instructions Booklet (probably not an actual item...don't get mad if you can't find it on ebay). If I followed the booklet exactly to the letter, would my space shuttle still be considered a NASA space shuttle? Or does it depend on where it is made and who put it together? The 'Frankenstein's creature is not human' crowd would say my shuttle would not be a NASA shuttle because it was not assembled at NASA facilities by NASA engineers. It is argued that since the creature wasn't conceived or born by natural manners, it shouldn't be considered human. But the 'creature is human' crowd would say it doesn't matter who put it together or where. If it looks and acts entirely human, it must be human.
Others may say the acts of violence against humans makes the creature a monster, not a human...that the murderer's brain makes the creature inhuman. But the murderer was made at some point by 'natural means.' Two humans conceived him. It isn't possible for two humans to conceive a creature that isn't human any more than it is possible for two dogs to conceive a cat. Hence, the murderer was human, and still performed inhuman acts. Further evidence can be found in soldiers at war, killing other humans constantly. But the soldiers are still considered human. If it is the matter of a murderer killing innocents, one need only look at the atomic bombs in World War II. Thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians died, but the inventors of the bomb, the one who dropped it, and the one who made the decision to drop it are all considered human.
A strong anti-human argument is that of emotions, which are considered human traits. If the creature doesn't have emotion, it can't be human. But a lot of people have problems with emotions and need drugs to achieve happiness or even just contentment. Or there is the case of the mentally incapacitated. If they don't have mental functions, and don't have emotions, they shouldn't be considered human (based on the 'emotion' argument). But they often still are.
The argument is not so much about whether the creature was human, but on your personal criteria concerning conception and introduction (birth) into the world, and the impact of inhuman acts and emotions. This melds into a world of other issues and philosophical ideas, but just pick a side, argue it, and welcome to the world of critical thinking. Best wishes.

Answer 3

Frankenstein's creature probably was not considered human. He was created by man, not God, and therefore had no soul. Mary Shelley wrote the book not only as a story in a freindly contest with her husband's friends, but also as a disturbing picture of what can happen when you try to create life under those circumstances. Some physicians of her day were trying to do just that with electricity.

Answer 4

Good question. The answer is multi-dimensional though. From the perspective of Dr. Frankenstein I would say that he believes he is a monster. Also, I think the creature himself thinks he is a monster.

From a reader's perspective, however, I would say that the creature has more humanisitic qualities than any other character in the book.

Answer 5

To Dr.Frodrick Von Frankenstein he is a human. To the rest of the world he's an abomination. To one he's a cute little zipperneck.

Answer 6

The creaure is a organic and organic build making use of human factors. he's, in contemporary words, neither a cyborg nor a robotic. asserting he's no longer human via fact no longer born of a mom is rather risky legally, via fact one would desire to argue approximately clones, man made insemination, etc, plus destiny advancements would enable the nicely-known technology fiction concept of an manmade womb. undergo in suggestions, too, MacBeth "premature ripped from his mom's womb". As for a soul, till Pope Benedict is hiding in the back of the demonstrate call you're making use of, i might question whether you have the theological history to be certain that. His rapid gaining know-how of shows to me that the creature certainly is remembering factors till now found out via his suggestions, and for this reason the soul would have remained additionally. As for his visual charm making his human prestige questionable, have you ever regarded at particularly some the creatures who carry out on WWF?

Answer 7

turn that one around, there are humans who are frankensteins. It was frankenstein who somehow plotted the passing of the wonderful godess, Marilyn Monroe. Frankenstein's a monster, Marilyn Monroe isn't and never was and will never be because Marilyn Monroe is the entire epitome of what a woman is supposed to define, after Marilyn Monroe died, all the women thereafter seemed to have taken a different route like, uh, you know, women rights, duh.

Answer 8

The full title of Mary Shelley's book is "Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus"

Prometheus brought fire to mankind & was punished forever by Zeus. What was the equivalent gift that Frankenstien or his monster brought to mankind?

Answer 9

No, he is not considered as human because when he is considered as a child, but he learns way too quickly for a baby human.

Answer 10

I had to my my coursework on this.

We did arguments for both sides.

I wouldnt consider him human but not a monster, Victor should be considered as a monster!!

-Cameron-