Frankenstein’s Elisabeth
16 May 2015
The question of the self and identity may be more important in ethics than it is in metaphysics, because without personhood and ‘the other’, there can be NO ethics at all.
That is why the ‘reconstructed’ Elisabeth (the one that Frankenstein revives out of love) kills herself – not because she realizes that she is ugly, but because she understands that she is not herself anymore. He made her out of and into somebody else, she has lost her identity.
And he did that for himself – not for her. Altruism has no place in Frankenstein, no matter how much we relate to the character. He ends up more lonely than he started because, not only he becomes a person, he also grows into a selfish one.
What you wrote about Frankenstein’s Elisabeth made me think about what identity really is. Who am I and what is my identity? More specifically, I’m wondering what part of me my identity is. Is it just a collection of my memories and beliefs? Is it all in my brain? What if my brain were to be transferred to another body. Would switching my outer shell change my identity at all?
In today’s day and age I believe a lot of people consider their bodies and appearance to be a very significant part of their identities. The importance of social media in our society might be a reason why that is. I definitely feel like my body and how I choose to present myself has some significance when it comes to my identity, but I personally believe it lies more in my mind and brain.
And maybe our identities aren’t tied strictly to neither our minds nor our bodies. I wonder if there is something in between, something more abstract. Is there such a thing as a soul?
Vendela,
these are all very good questions. And we’ll debate them in detail, in class, when we discuss the topic of ‘the self’. But given how wide the topic is, it’s important to define your conceptual framework, which can function as a platform on which you can better develop your line of arguments (like a football pitch, or a tennis court – they ensure the match takes place in an organised manner). So, what do you think would be the most appropriate framework for your enquiry — depending on the core focus. Is your main concern the permanence of the self (for you talk about memories and beliefs, which can change or be discharged)? Or is it the substance of the self – and if so, would you prefer to discuss it in Cartesian terms (the two substances and the mind-body problem), or in contemporary, neuro-philosophical terms such as brain plasticity and its role in self-identity?
Your last paragraph opens the way to another perspective – about in/out. You seem to suggest there may be an alternative to the way we perceive ourselves from the inside, but you don’t mention what that alternative might be. Is it related to the community? Or is it something closer to the universal consciousness (Kant), or the Buddhist flow of consciousness?
You see, a whole series of interpretations open up, with each conceptual framework that we choose.
Well done to ask the questions, they are the start of philosophy!