Both Shelley’s and Scott’s texts highlight the moral and ethical issues regarding the pursuit of knowledge, the evolutionary relationship between man and technology and the concerns surrounding man attempting to play god. Our ideals and morals that differ in texts through context, scrupulously shape our image of humanity. MAN PLAYING GOD Frankenstein is a hybrid blend of gothic horror and science fiction, in comparison Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner is a dystopian gothic film noir. Despite contextual differences, the texts target the hunger of man trying to play god. Each text highlights humanity’s flaws, such as ego, ambition, obsession with power and greed.
Mary Shelley’s prose fiction novel, Frankenstein (1818) and Ridley Scott’s science fiction film, Blade Runner 1982), view the change in value of the pursuit of knowledge that leads to the moral ramifications of the creators Victor and Tyrell. Both texts accentuate the audacity of man playing God, in juxtaposition to the creations humane acts, leading to the questioning of what it means to be human. Shelley challenges the values of the Enlightenment era in the 1800s, forming Victor’s ambition to pursue the secret of life, whilst Scott criticizes the abuse of capitalism in the 1980s, deeming Tyrell’s drive for commodification. Although they were composed two centuries apart, both texts treat similar thematic concerns. By comparing their approaches to such ideas, however, it is evident that context affects meaning in complex ways, as both Frankenstein and Blade Runner reflect the values and anxieties of their times.
From the evidence provided earlier, it can be seen that in fact, religion and science are not two opposing powers offering different explanations for the same events, but merely two entities asking entirely different questions(The Godless Paladin 2009). Science seeks to answer objective ‘how’ questions, and uses public, repeatable data in order to explain exactly how we came to be. Instead, religion asks personal ‘why’ questions about the meaning and purpose of our lives and about our ultimate origin and destiny. It explores the existence of beauty and the experiences of our soul, including the emotions humankind feels(Barbour 1990). Therefore, it can be seen that a contextual interpretation of the Judeo-Christian creation story, which seeks to uncover the religious truth contained within, is compatible with modern scientific theory, as it asks a different question to the one science
It is a technological dominance on a higher level. There is no individuality in the Brave New World, but an illusion individuality that is instilled with the unreal world. Yet, in the both worlds the struggle of the individual against technology is evident. In Brave New World, John was 'abducted' from a world of individuality into the perfect world of Bernard's and Lenina's collectivity. John looks at both worlds through the lenses of the religion he got from the Reservation-a mixture of Christianity and American Indian beliefs - and the old-fashioned morality he learned from reading Shakespeare.
R.S “Science has fully explained religious experience”. To what extent do you agree? I agree to a certain extent however they are some problems are present in sciences argument for why religious experiences occur. Freud argued that religious experiences are nothing but a psychological conflict within the mind. He came up with the idea that religious experiences are nothing but wishful thinking that cause the illusion of the oldest and most profound idea one has.
Believing in stories Popular culture is filled with self-help books and how-to series that explore religion, but sometimes a revelation of faith can come in a work of fiction. Rarely these books are directly religious; often, more philosophical; and sometimes just a great story. Five unique books have made up Otterbein College’s Religion course. They are Clan of the Cave Bear by Jean Auel, Illusions by Richard Bach, Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein, Siddartha by Hermann Hesse, and The Life of Pi by Yann Martel. These stories, at their root, examine religion as a method humans have developed to make their lives more comfortable, meaningful, and more understandable.
In Mark Twain’s novel, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Twain uses his characters and events to protest religion, society, and slavery. Slavery plays a huge role in the novel, but Twain uses his novel to show the effects of slavery. Twain illustrates society on a lower level and shows examples of how gullible and idiotic society can be at times. Most of all Twain uses his novel to protest religion, specifically Christianity. The novel emanates signs of religious protest.
C.S. Lewis is known for smuggling theology into several, if not most of his literary works. For those turned off by such concepts, Lewis subtly yet successfully incorporates these theological themes into his writings. One example that highlights this idea is his space trilogy, consisting of Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength. Throughout the series, each successive novel builds upon the first when analyzing Lewis’s addition of theology.
Mark Twain uses his novel, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, to the many problems facing American society. Twain use satire to criticize the Southern society. By that Twain satirizes some aspects of organized religion; Tom Sawyer’s Gang, and also the Southern civilized society. How Twain use satire to demonstrate many of civilizations problems. Religion is one of the key victims of Twain’s satire throughout the novel.
Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’ is another Gothic text in which the protagonist epitomizes the fears and anxieties of society, similarly reflected in the sketch. The protagonist, the interchangeable Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde both fears and scorns Christianity. The text however, is consistently scattered with religious and biblical allusions, both stated and assumed. Dr Jekyll believes that ‘man is not truly one, but truly two’ (p.84). Through the course of the novel, Jekyll tries to separate the two sides of his personality but something goes wrong, instead of ‘coming forth an angel’ (p.89), Jekyll becomes the fiend Hyde.