Dracula and Frankenstein: March 2009

Excerpts Dracula and Frankenstein

Bram Stoker's Dracula:

Excerpts from Dracula
I was not alone. The room was the same, unchanged in any way since I came into it. I could see along the floor, in the brilliant moonlight, my own footsteps marked where I had disturbed the long accumulation of dust. In the moonlight opposite me were three young women, ladies by their dress and manner. I thought at the time that I must be dreaming when I saw them, they threw no shadow on the floor. They came close to me,
and looked at me for some time, and then whispered together. Two were dark, and had high aquiline noses, like the Count, and great dark, piercing eyes, that seemed to be almost red when contrasted with the pale yellow moon. The other was fair,as fair as can be, with great masses of golden hair and eyes like pale sapphires. I seemed somehow to know her face, and to know it in connection with some dreamy fear, but I could not recollect at the moment how or where. All three had brilliant white teeth that shone like pearls against the ruby of their voluptuous lips. There was something about them that made me uneasy, some longing and at the same time some deadly fear. I felt in my heart a wicked, burning desire that they would kiss me with those red lips. It is not good to note this down, lest some day it should meet Mina's eyes and cause her pain, but it is the truth. They whispered together, and then they all three laughed, such a silvery, musical laugh, but as hard as though the sound never could have come through the softness of human lips. It was like the intolerable, tingling sweetness of waterglasses when played on by a cunning hand. The fair girl shook her head coquettishly, and the other two urged her on.
One said, "Go on! You are first, and we shall follow.Yours' is the right to begin."
The other added, "He is young and strong. There are kisses for us all."
I lay quiet, looking out from under my eyelashes in an agony of delightful anticipation. The fair girl advanced and bent over me till I could feel the movement of her breath upon me. Sweet it was in one sense, honey-sweet, and sent the same tingling through the nerves as her voice, but with a bitter underlying the sweet, a bitter offensiveness, as one smells in blood. I was afraid to raise my eyelids, but looked out and saw perfectly under the lashes. The girl went on her knees, and bent over me, simply gloating. There was a deliberate voluptuousness which was both thrilling and repulsive, and as she arched her neck she actually licked her lips like an animal, till I could see in the moonlight the moisture shining on the scarlet lips and on the red tongue as it lapped the white sharp teeth. Lower and lower went her head as the lips went below the range of my mouth and chin and seemed to fasten on my throat. Then she paused, and I could hear the churning sound of her tongue as it licked her teeth and lips, and I could feel the hot breath on my neck. Then the skin of my throat began to tingle as one's flesh does when the hand that is to tickle it approaches nearer, nearer. I could feel the soft, shivering touch of the lips on the super sensitive skin of my throat, and the hard dents of two sharp teeth, just touching and pausing there. I closed my eyes in languorous ecstasy and waited, waited with beating heart.

But at that instant, another sensation swept through me as quick as lightning. I was conscious of the presence of the Count, and of his being as if lapped in a storm of fury. As my eyes opened involuntarily I saw his strong hand grasp the slender neck of the fair woman and with giant's power draw it back, the blue eyes transformed with fury, the white teeth champing with rage, and the fair cheeks blazing red with passion.
But the Count! Never did I imagine such wrath and fury, even to the demons of the pit. His eyes were positively blazing. The red light in them was lurid, as if the flames of hell fire blazed behind them. His face was deathly pale, and the lines of it were hard like drawn wires. The thick eyebrows that met over the nose now seemed like a heaving bar of whitehot metal. With a fierce sweep of his arm, he hurled the woman from him, and then motioned to the others, as though he were beating them back. It was the same imperious gesture that I had seen used to the wolves. In a voice which, though low and almost in a whisper seemed to cut through the air and then ring in the room he said,
"How dare you touch him, any of you? How dare you cast eyes on him when I had forbidden it? Back, I tell you all! This man belongs to me! Beware how you meddle with him, or you'll have to deal with me."
The fair girl, with a laugh of ribald coquetry, turned to answer him. "You yourself never loved. You never love!" On this the other women joined,and such a mirthless, hard, soulless laughter rang through the room that it almost made me faint to hear. It seemed like the pleasure of fiends.
Then the Count turned, after looking at my face attentively, and said in a soft whisper, "Yes, I too can love. You yourselves can tell it from the past. Is it not so? Well, now I promise you that when I am done with him you shall kiss him at your will. Now go! Go! I must awaken him, for there is work to be done."
"Are we to have nothing tonight?" said one of them, with a low laugh, as she pointed to the bag which he had thrown upon the floor, and which moved as though there were some living thing within it. For answer he nodded his head. One of the women jumped forward and opened it. If my ears did not deceive me there was a gasp and a low wail, as of a half smothered child. The women closed round, whilst I was aghast with horror. But as I looked, they disappeared, and with them the dreadful bag. There was no door near them, and they could not have passed me without my noticing. They simply seemed to fade into the rays of the moonlight and pass out through the window, for I could see outside the dim, shadowy forms for a moment before they entirely faded away.
Then the horror overcame me,and I sank down unconscious.
Van Helsing’s Scientific Description of the Vampire: "Now let us see how far the general powers arrayed against us are restrict, and how the individual cannot. In fine, let us consider the limitations of the vampire in general, and of this one in particular.
"All we have to go upon are traditions and superstitions. These do not at the first appear much, when the matter is one of life and death, nay of more than either life or death. Yet must we be satisfied, in the first place because we have to be, no other means is at our control, and secondly, because, after all these things, tradition and superstition, are everything. Does not the belief in vampires rest for others, though not, alas! for us, on them! A year ago which of us would have received such a possibility, in the midst of our scientific, sceptical, matter-of-fact nineteenth century? We even scouted a belief that we saw justified under our very eyes. Take it, then, that the vampire, and the belief in his limitations and his cure, rest for the moment on the same base. For, let me tell you, he is known everywhere that men have been. In old Greece, in old Rome, he flourish in Germany all over, in France, in India, even in the Chermosese, and in China, so far from us in all ways, there even is he, and the peoples for him at this day. He have follow the wake of the berserker Icelander, the devil-begotten Hun, the Slav, the Saxon, the Magyar.

"So far, then, we have all we may act upon, and let me tell you that very much of the beliefs are justified by what we have seen in our own so unhappy experience. The vampire live on, and cannot die by mere passing of the time, he can flourish when that he can fatten on the blood of the living. Even more, we have seen amongst us that he can even grow younger, that his vital faculties grow strenuous, and seem as though they refresh themselves when his special pabulum is plenty.
"But he cannot flourish without this diet, he eat not as others. Even friend Jonathan, who lived with him for weeks, did never see him eat, never! He throws no shadow, he make in the mirror no reflect, as again Jonathan observe. He has the strength of many of his hand, witness again Jonathan when he shut the door against the wolves, and when he help him from the diligence too. He can transform himself to wolf, as we gather from the ship arrival in Whitby, when he tear open the dog, he can be as bat, as Madam Mina saw him on the window at Whitby, and as friend John saw him fly from this so near house, and as my friend Quincey saw him at the window of Miss Lucy.
"He can come in mist which he create, that noble ship's captain proved him of this, but, from what we know, the distance he can make this mist is limited, and it can only be round himself.
"He come on moonlight rays as elemental dust, as again Jonathan saw those sisters in the castle of Dracula. He become so small, we ourselves saw Miss Lucy, ere she was at peace, slip through a hairbreadth space at the tomb door. He can, when once he find his way, come out from anything or into anything, no matter how close it be bound or even fused up with fire, solder you call it. He can see in the dark, no small power this, in a world which is one half shut from the light. Ah, but hear me through.
"He can do all these things, yet he is not free. Nay, he is even more prisoner than the slave of the galley, than the madman in his cell. He cannot go where he lists, he who is not of nature has yet to obey some of nature's laws, why we know not. He may not enter anywhere at the first, unless there be some one of the household who bid him to come, though afterwards he can come as he please. His power ceases, as does that of all evil things, at the coming of the day.
"Only at certain times can he have limited freedom. If he be not at the place whither he is bound, he can only change himself at noon or at exact sunrise or sunset. These things we are told, and in this record of ours we have proof by inference. Thus, whereas he can do as he will within his limit, when he have his earth-home, his coffin-home,
his hell-home, the place unhallowed, as we saw when he went to the grave of the suicide at Whitby, still at other time he can only change when the time come. It is said, too, that he can only pass running water at the slack or the flood of the tide. Then there are things which so afflict him that he has no power, as the garlic that we know of, and as for things sacred, as this symbol, my crucifix, that was amongst us even now when we resolve, to them he is nothing, but in their presence he take his place far off and silent with respect. There are others, too, which I shall tell you of, lest in our seeking we may need them.
"The branch of wild rose on his coffin keep him that he move
not from it, a sacred bullet fired into the coffin kill him so that he be true dead, and as for the stake through him, we know already of its peace, or the cut off head that giveth rest. We have seen it with our eyes.
"Thus when we find the habitation of this man-that-was, we can confine him to his coffin and destroy him, if we obey what we know. But he is clever. I have asked my friend Arminius, of Buda-Pesth University, to make his record, and from all the means that are, he tell me of what he has been. He must, indeed, have been that Voivode Dracula who won his name against the Turk, over the great river on the very frontier of Turkeyland. If it be so, then was he no common man, for in that time, and for centuries after, he was spoken of as the cleverest and the most cunning, as well as the bravest of the sons of the `land beyond the forest.' That mighty brain and that iron resolution went with him to his grave, and are even now arrayed against us. The Draculas were, says Arminius, a great and noble race, though now and again were scions who were held by their coevals to have had dealings with the Evil One. They learned his secrets in the Scholomance, amongst the mountains over Lake Hermanstadt, where the devil claims the tenth scholar as his due. In the records are such words as `stregoica' witch, `ordog' and `pokol' Satan and hell, and in one manuscript this very Dracula is spoken of as `wampyr,'which we all understand too well. There have been from the loins of this very one great men and good women, and their graves make sacred the earth where alone this foulness can dwell. For it is not the least of its terrors that this evil thing is rooted deep in all good, in soil barren of holy memories it cannot rest."

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

Excerpts from Frankenstein
Dr. Frankenstein learns the secret to creating a living being:Remember, I am not recording the vision of a madman. After days and nights of incredible labour and fatigue, I succeeded in discovering the cause of generation and life; nay, more, I became myself capable of bestowing animation upon lifeless matter.
When I found so astonishing a power placed within my hands, I hesitated a long time concerning the manner in which I should employ it. Although I possessed the capacity of bestowing animation, yet to prepare a frame for the reception of it, with all its intricacies of fibres, muscles, and veins, still remained a work of inconceivable difficulty and labour. I doubted at first whether I should attempt the creation of a being like myself, or one of simpler organization; but my imagination was too much exalted by my first success to permit me to doubt of my ability to give life to an animal as complete and wonderful as man. The materials at present within my command hardly appeared adequate to so arduous an undertaking, but I doubted not that I should ultimately succeed. I prepared myself for a multitude of reverses; my operations might be incessantly baffled, and at last my work be imperfect, yet when I considered the improvement which every day takes place in science and mechanics, I was encouraged to hope my present attempts would at least lay the foundations of future success. Nor could I consider the magnitude and complexity of my plan as any argument of its impracticability. It was with these feelings that I began the creation of a human being. As the minuteness of the parts formed a great hindrance to my speed, I resolved, contrary to my first intention, to make the being of a gigantic stature, that is to say, about eight feet in height, and proportionably large. After having formed this determination and having spent some months in successfully collecting and arranging my materials, I began.No one can conceive the variety of feelings which bore me onwards, like a hurricane, in the first enthusiasm of success. Life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through, and pour a torrent of light into our dark world. A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me. No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs. Pursuing these reflections, I thought that if I could bestow animation upon lifeless matter, I might in process of time (although I now found it impossible) renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption.

It was on a dreary night of November that I beheld the accomplishment of my toils. With an anxiety that almost amounted to agony, I collected the instruments of life around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet. It was already one in the morning; the rain pattered dismally against the panes, and my candle was nearly burnt out, when, by the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs. How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful! Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion and straight black lips.

Frankenstein meets his monster and the monster tells his tale:"Devil," I exclaimed, "do you dare approach me? And do not you fear the fierce vengeance of my arm wreaked on your miserable head? Begone, vile insect! Or rather, stay, that I may trample you to dust! And, oh! That I could, with the extinction of your miserable existence, restore those victims whom you have so diabolically murdered!""I expected this reception," said the daemon. "All men hate the wretched; how, then, must I be hated, who am miserable beyond all living things! Yet you, my creator, detest and spurn me, thy creature, to whom thou art bound by ties only dissoluble by the annihilation of one of us. You purpose to kill me. How dare you sport thus with life? Do your duty towards me, and I will do mine towards you and the rest of mankind. If you will comply with my conditions, I will leave them and you at peace; but if you refuse, I will glut the maw of death, until it be satiated with the blood of your remaining friends." “Remember, thou hast made me more powerful than thyself; my height is superior to thine, my joints more supple. But I will not be tempted to set myself in opposition to thee. I am thy creature, and I will be even mild and docile to my natural lord and king if thou wilt also perform thy part, the which thou owest me. Oh, Frankenstein, be not equitable to every other and trample upon me alone, to whom thy justice, and even thy clemency and affection, is most due. Remember that I am thy creature; I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy for no misdeed. Everywhere I see bliss, from which I alone am irrevocably excluded. I was benevolent and good; misery made me a fiend. Make me happy, and I shall again be virtuous.""How can I move thee? Will no entreaties cause thee to turn a favourable eye upon thy creature, who implores thy goodness and compassion? Believe me, Frankenstein, I was benevolent; my soul glowed with love and humanity; but am I not alone, miserably alone? You, my creator, abhor me; what hope can I gather from your fellow creatures, who owe me nothing? They spurn and hate me. The desert mountains and dreary glaciers are my refuge. I have wandered here many days; the caves of ice, which I only do not fear, are a dwelling to me, and the only one which man does not grudge. Shall I not then hate them who abhor me? I will keep no terms with my enemies. I am miserable, and they shall share my wretchedness. Yet it is in your power to recompense me, and deliver them from an evil which it only remains for you to make so great, that not only you and your family, but thousands of others, shall be swallowed up in the whirlwinds of its rage. Let your compassion be moved, and do not disdain me. Listen to my tale; when you have heard that, abandon or commiserate me, as you shall judge that I deserve. But hear me. The guilty are allowed, by human laws, bloody as they are, to speak in their own defence before they are condemned. Listen to me, Frankenstein. You accuse me of murder, and yet you would, with a satisfied conscience, destroy your own creature. Oh, praise the eternal justice of man! Yet I ask you not to spare me; listen to me, and then, if you can, and if you will, destroy the work of your hands."

Then I told my tale: "It is with considerable difficulty that I remember the origin of my being; all the events of that period appear confused and indistinct. A strange multiplicity of sensations seized me, and I saw, felt, heard, and smelt at the same time; and it was, indeed, a long time before I learned to distinguish between the operations of my various senses. By degrees, I remember, a stronger light pressed upon my nerves, so that I was obliged to shut my eyes. Darkness then came over me and troubled me, but hardly had I felt this when, by opening my eyes, as I now suppose, the light poured in upon me again. I walked and, I believe, descended, but I presently found a great alteration in my sensations. Before, dark and opaque bodies had surrounded me, impervious to my touch or sight; but I now found that I could wander on at liberty, with no obstacles which I could not either surmount or avoid. The light became more and more oppressive to me, and the heat wearying me as I walked, I sought a place where I could receive shade. This was the forest near Ingolstadt; and here I lay by the side of a brook resting from my fatigue, until I felt tormented by hunger and thirst. This roused me from my nearly dormant state, and I ate some berries which I found hanging on the trees or lying on the ground. I slaked my thirst at the brook, and then lying down, was overcome by sleep."It was dark when I awoke; I felt cold also, and half frightened, as it were, instinctively, finding myself so desolate. Before I had quitted your apartment, on a sensation of cold, I had covered myself with some clothes, but these were insufficient to secure me from the dews of night. I was a poor, helpless, miserable wretch; I knew, and could distinguish, nothing; but feeling pain invade me on all sides, I sat down and wept. I arrived at a village. How miraculous did this appear! The huts, the neater cottages, and stately houses engaged my admiration by turns. The vegetables in the gardens, the milk and cheese that I saw placed at the windows of some of the cottages, allured my appetite. One of the best of these I entered, but I had hardly placed my foot within the door before the children shrieked, and one of the women fainted. The whole village was roused; some fled, some attacked me, until, grievously bruised by stones and many other kinds of missile weapons, I escaped to the open country and fearfully took refuge in a low hovel, quite bare, and making a wretched appearance after the palaces I had beheld in the village. This hovel however, joined a cottage of a neat and pleasant appearance, but after my late dearly bought experience, I dared not enter it. My place of refuge was constructed of wood, but so low that I could with difficulty sit upright in it. No wood, however, was placed on the earth, which formed the floor, but it was dry; and although the wind entered it by innumerable chinks, I found it an agreeable asylum from the snow and rain."Here, then, I retreated and lay down happy to have found a shelter, however miserable, from the inclemency of the season, and still more from the barbarity of man. As soon as morning dawned I crept from my kennel, that I might view the adjacent cottage and discover if I could remain in the habitation I had found. It was situated against the back of the cottage and surrounded on the sides which were exposed by a pig sty and a clear pool of water. One part was open, and by that I had crept in; but now I covered every crevice by which I might be perceived with stones and wood, yet in such a manner that I might move them on occasion to pass out; all the light I enjoyed came through the sty, and that was sufficient for me."A considerable period elapsed before I discovered one of the causes of the uneasiness of this amiable family: it was poverty, and they suffered that evil in a very distressing degree. Their nourishment consisted entirely of the vegetables of their garden and the milk of one cow, which gave very little during the winter, when its masters could scarcely procure food to support it. They often, I believe, suffered the pangs of hunger very poignantly, especially the two younger cottagers, for several times they placed food before the old man when they reserved none for themselves."This trait of kindness moved me sensibly. I had been accustomed, during the night, to steal a part of their store for my own consumption, but when I found that in doing this I inflicted pain on the cottagers, I abstained and satisfied myself with berries, nuts, and roots which I gathered from a neighbouring wood. "I discovered also another means through which I was enabled to assist their labours. I found that the youth spent a great part of each day in collecting wood for the family fire, and during the night I often took his tools, the use of which I quickly discovered, and brought home firing sufficient for the consumption of several days"By degrees I made a discovery of still greater moment. I found that these people possessed a method of communicating their experience and feelings to one another by articulate sounds. I perceived that the words they spoke sometimes produced pleasure or pain, smiles or sadness,in the minds and countenances of the hearers. This was indeed a godlike science, and I ardently desired to become acquainted with it. But I was baffled in every attempt I made for this purpose. Their pronunciation was quick, and the words they uttered, not having any apparent connection with visible objects, I was unable to discover any clue by which I could unravel the mystery of their reference. By great application, however, and after having remained during the space of several revolutions of the moon in my hovel, I discovered the names that were given to some of the most familiar objects of discourse; I learned and applied the words, `fire,' `milk,' `bread,' and `wood.' I learned also the names of the cottagers themselves. The youth and his companion had each of them several names, but the old man had only one, which was `father.' The girl was called `sister' or `Agatha,' and the youth `Felix,' `brother,' or `son.' I cannot describe the delight I felt when I learned the ideas appropriated to each of these sounds and was able to pronounce them. I distinguished several other words without being able as yet to understand or apply them, such as `good,' `dearest,' `unhappy.'"I had admired the perfect forms of my cottagers--their grace, beauty, and delicate complexions; but how was I terrified when I viewed myself in a transparent pool! At first I started back, unable to believe that it was indeed I who was reflected in the mirror; and when I became fully convinced that I was in reality the monster that I am, I was filled with the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification. Alas! I did not yet entirely know the fatal effects of this miserable deformity."My mode of life in my hovel was uniform. During the morning I attended the motions of the cottagers, and when they were dispersed in various occupations, I slept; the remainder of the day was spent in observing my friends. When they had retired to rest, if there was any moon or the night was star-light, I went into the woods and collected my own food and fuel for the cottage. When I returned, as often as it was necessary, I cleared their path from the snow and performed those offices that I had seen done by Felix. I afterwards found that these labours, performed by an invisible hand, greatly astonished them; and once or twice I heard them, on these occasions, utter the words `good spirit,' `wonderful'; but I did not then understand the signification of these terms.I thought (foolish wretch!) that it might be in my power to restore happiness to these deserving people. When I slept or was absent, the forms of the venerable blind father, the gentle Agatha, and the excellent Felix flitted before me. I looked upon them as superior beings who would be the arbiters of my future destiny. "These thoughts exhilarated me and led me to apply with fresh ardour to the acquiring the art of language. My organs were indeed harsh, but supple; and although my voice was very unlike the soft music of their tones, yet I pronounced such words as I understood with tolerable ease. It was as the ass and the lap-dog; yet surely the gentle ass whose intentions were affectionate, although his manners were rude, deserved better treatment than blows and execration."Every conversation of the cottagers now opened new wonders to me. While I listened to the instructions which Felix bestowed upon the Arabian, the strange system of human society was explained to me. I heard of the division of property, of immense wealth and squalid poverty, of rank, descent, and noble blood.And what was I? Of my creation and creator I was absolutely ignorant, but I knew that I possessed no money, no friends, no kind of property. I was, besides, endued with a figure hideously deformed and loathsome; I was not even of the same nature as man. I was more agile than they and could subsist upon coarser diet; I bore the extremes of heat and cold with less injury to my frame; my stature far exceeded theirs. When I looked around I saw and heard of none like me. Was I, then, a monster, a blot upon the earth, from which all men fled and whom all men disowned?"Other lessons were impressed upon me even more deeply. I heard of the difference of sexes, and the birth and growth of children, how the father doted on the smiles of the infant, and the lively sallies of the older child, how all the life and cares of themother were wrapped up in the precious charge, how the mind of youth expanded and gained knowledge, of brother, sister, and all the various relationships which bind one human being to another in mutual bonds."But where were my friends and relations? No father had watched my infant days, no mother had blessed me with smiles and caresses; or if they had, all my past life was now a blot, a blind vacancy in which I distinguished nothing. From my earliest remembrance I had been as I then was in height and proportion. I had never yet seen a being resembling me or who claimed any intercourse with me. What was I? The question again recurred, to be answered only with groans.
One day I walked to the cottage, where the old man sat alone: I knocked. `Who is there?' said the old man. `Come in.'"`Enter,' said De Lacey, `and I will try in what manner I can torelieve your wants.” I sat down, and a silence ensued. I knew that every minute was precious to me, yet I remained irresolute in what manner to commence the interview, when the old man addressed me. `By your language, stranger, I suppose you are my countryman; are you French?' “I am an unfortunate and deserted creature, I look around and I have no relation or friend upon earth. These amiable people to whom I go have never seen me and know little of me. I am full of fears, for if I fail there, I am an outcast in the world forever.'"`Do not despair. To be friendless is indeed to be unfortunate, but the hearts of men, when unprejudiced by any obvious self-interest, are full of brotherly love and charity. Rely, therefore, on your hopes; and if these friends are good and amiable, do not despair.'"`They are kind--they are the most excellent creatures in the world; but, unfortunately, they are prejudiced against me. I have good dispositions; my life has been hitherto harmless and in some degree beneficial; but a fatal prejudice clouds their eyes, and where they ought to see a feeling and kind friend, they behold only a detestable monster.'"`That is indeed unfortunate; but if you are really blameless,cannot you undeceive them?'"`I am about to undertake that task; and it is on that account that I feel so many overwhelming terrors. I tenderly love these friends; I have, unknown to them, been for many months in the habits of daily kindness towards them; but they believe that I wish to injure them, and it is that prejudice which I wish to overcome.'"`Where do these friends reside?'"`Near this spot.'"The old man paused and then continued, `If you will unreservedly confide to me the particulars of your tale, I perhaps may be of use in undeceiving them. I am blind and cannot judge of your countenance, but there is something in your words which persuades me that you are sincere. I am poor and an exile, but it will afford me true pleasure to be in any way serviceable to a human creature.'"`Heaven forbid! Even if you were really criminal, for that can only drive you to desperation, and not instigate you to virtue. I also am unfortunate; I and my family have been condemned, although innocent; judge, therefore, if I do not feel for your misfortunes.'"`How can I thank you, my best and only benefactor? From your lips first have I heard the voice of kindness directed towards me; I shall be forever grateful; and your present humanity assures me of success with those friends whom I am on the point of meeting.'"`May I know the names and residence of those friends?' "I paused. At that moment I heard the steps of my younger protectors. I had not a moment to lose, but seizing the hand of the old man, I cried, `Now is the time! Save and protect me! You and your family are the friends whom I seek. Do not you desert me in the hour of trial!'"`Great God!' exclaimed the old man. `Who are you?'"At that instant the cottage door was opened, and Felix, Safie, and Agatha entered. Who can describe their horror and consternation on beholding me? Agatha fainted, and Safie, unable to attend to her friend, rushed out of the cottage. Felix darted forward, and withsupernatural force tore me from his father, to whose knees I clung, in a transport of fury, he dashed me to the ground and struck me violently with a stick. I could have torn him limb from limb, as the lion rends the antelope. But my heart sank within me as withbitter sickness, and I refrained. I saw him on the point of repeating his blow, when, overcome by pain and anguish, I quitted the cottage, and in the general tumult escaped unperceived to my hovel."

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Life vs. Death

1. As mentioned by Wayne Kreger in an online article, throughout civilizations we have the existence of this creature that makes its feeding from human blood; which tends to come after people during the night. There are many names given to this species: chiang-shih in China, Camazotz in Mayan civilization, rakshasas in India, yara-ma-yha-who in Australia, and strix in Roman civilization. Being from Dominican Republic I want to share the idea we have. We usually don’t refer to vampires but to witches. It is a popular belief that witches fly during the night and that they tend to soak the blood out of children. However this belief has been diminishing over time and it’s highly concentrated in the rural areas.

2. The tendency we have to call these creatures “evil” or even monsters is highly based on our culture. When we listen about someone that did something awful we call that person a “monster”. It’s because we’ve been taught since we are little “that monsters are coming to get us”. So it’s a learned perspective. However based on nature v nurture, I think that the “evil” in these creatures is highly contemplated in their nature rather than on their nurture. The things they do it’s not because of their experience, it’s because it’s their nature to do so.

3. Dr. Richard Seed said "God made man in his own image. God intended for man to become one with God. Cloning and the reprogramming of DNA is the first step in becoming one with God." The main controversy around cloning is that humans would be able to control existence to some extent. Even though cloning organs has its very good aspects on it, the worry around many people it’s that it won’t stop there. Moreover many people argue that if things are meant to be, there shouldn’t be anything to stop it. However right there comes a greater debate: If things are not to be stopped, then why do we have medicines? Let us just die if that is what’s meant to.
Overall there is a lot of talking regarding this issue. It’s going to take a while before we see any progress on the matter, if we indeed get to see some.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Drac and Frank blog

Question #1: Every culture around the world has their own belief about vampires which stems from myths about the creature. In the 18th century in Southeastern Europe it was said that vampires were revenants of evil beings, suicide victims, or witches. However it was also said that vampires could be created by being bitten by a vampire or an evil spirit possessing a corpse. In Russian folklore, vampires had once been people or witches that had rebelled against the church. In West Africa, people believed that vampires were able to take the form of a firefly and hunt children. The Eastern Cape region of Africa had beliefs that vampires could take the form of a large bird and summon thunder and lightning. Chinese believe that vampires are reanimated corpses that kill the living in order to absorb life essence. Different cultures see vampires with either dread or appeal because of the tales passed down from ancient times.

Question #2: The nature of a being is the inherited qualities at birth. The nurture of a being refers to growth based on personal learning experiences. It can be argued that a vampire would not be considered evil because they are just doing what they must do to survive. Humans are not looked at as evil for killing other creatures in order to provide food to survive. It is just how we perceive the nature of the vampire as being different from ours that makes us think they are evil. Frankenstein was not created to be evil. But after being rejected by humans based on his hideousness, became evil by seeking vengeance against his creator.

Question #3: As technology progresses we are capable of extremely complex processes such as cloning and stem cell research. These processes pertaining to creating life will always cause conflict because of moral and religious beliefs. I believe that cloning itself is not necessary and is just done because we have the capability to do so. However when cloning is used in stem cell research in order to potentially treat disease can be very helpful to us.

Monday, March 9, 2009

Evil or Not?

1. Throughout my research of vampires. i have come to see that many cultures carry many different views on vampires. Although some may be good, a large amount of cultures believe vampires are bad. In Europe, many vampires were believed to turn into wolves. Another belief was that vampires would disguise themselves as maidens and lure there men into bed and kill them then. In North America, bizarrely enough a vampire was believed to be a spirit of an unbaptized child who played mischievous pranks. The vampire throughout many cultures holds appeal and dread because, vampires were held to be the blame of birth defects, many diseases, forms of insanity and death.
2.As we see throughout our whole lives, Dracula and Frankenstein were always viewed as evil. In all the stories we read, they are responsible for mishaps and murders and robberies in society. In my view, these two characters are not evil, but simply products of their environment. Dracula was always viewed as evil. It is almost sure that he was never given a chance and always viewed as a menace to society. In this alone we can see why he would react with such an violent nature. In the case of Frankenstein, he was created a monster. He was not viewed normally in society. He was not treated with any respect at all. End result Frankenstein being angry. We will never know if any of these so called "monsters" had any good intention, but if given a chance we could of been proven wrong.
3. In the process of stem cell research, many advancements have been made. Many of the body cells have been replicated. In my view this is a great step towards the cure of many lethal diseases. If certain body parts can be replicated to save lives, do the ethics really matter? In my view, even if we abuse the power to replicate body parts and what not, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages greatly. Many people argue that if god wanted us to have cures for many of the diseases, he would've made them available to us, but put yourself in the shoes of a rape victim, who contracted aids because of the incident. Is it fair for you to suffer from a disease when you aren't responsible for the cause? Wouldn't you wish there were a cure then?

What About Count Chocula

What is most fascinating to me about different cultures perceptions of vampires, are the differences between how on how these cultures warded them off and killed them. Throughout Asia and many other parts of the world where Christianity is not the prevalent religion, there is very little or no historical evidence of Holy Water and Crosses being used in the fight against vampires. In contrast throughout Eastern Europe where vampires originated and as these countries Christianized, the powers of the Catholic Church became more prevalent. The appeal of Vampires lies with the fear of the Dark Side and their close association with the Devil.

Is Dracula evil? Well in the court of Vampire opinion we would certainly be the ones out of the norm. Why to vampires we mere mortals who do not feast the blood of our brothers are probably considered an inferior race. We do not fly like bats, and we wonder about during the sunlight. We are content with our Pepsi and Vitamin Water and not Type O. Maybe to them we are the ones who have not been nurtured?

With regards to Playing God, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops strongly opposed the destruction of embryos for medical research; they called the destructive research already performed on existing embryonic stem cell lines “morally unacceptable”. The fact of the matter is that once the situation hits home and it’s you or your loved one facing a life threatening disease, we all the sudden want to turn every stone and fly all over the world in search of alternative cures. We see this constantly with celebrities who have unfortunately been stricken with illnesses and then become champions for those causes. Most notably Nancy Reagan, wife of the most celebrated conservative President in the last 30 years supports stem cell research after her husband died from Alzheimer’s. When it hits home!

Monsters and Cloning

1.) 1.) Vampire myths exist on 6 of the 7 continents. Cultures that stretch from as far as Armenian to Australia mostly hold vampires in the same light. They are supernatural creatures that prey on humans and suck their bodies dry. One culture that sticks out as different is the Albanian culture of the vampire. In Albania vampires are know as Lugats. Albanians believe that Lugats do not kill their victims. Instead they only feed on them briefly. This brief period of feeding is seen as harmless. In ancient Babylon, vampires or Ekimmu, where people who died prematurely, were taken by a violent death, never fell in love, or just were not buried properly. It was believed that the souls of those people were lost and would wandered the earth, destroying every person they met. In Thailand, vampires are beautiful women that were killed by animals. With the assistance of their beauty, they prey on young men. In most every culture, besides the Albanian culture, vampires are seen as dangerous and scary creatures that have the sole job of preying on human beings. I believe vampires hold appeal and dread from one country to another because they are supernatural beings with unknown origins. Every culture has their view on death and vampires seem to always find their way into that view. I believe their mysteriousness and mystique keep people intrigued and scared.

2.) Nature versus Nurture has been hotly debated for a long time. Do people act the way they do because of what is hardwired into their brain or because the experiences they lived through? The Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, had a theory that he didn’t intend to be applied to nature versus nurture but instead intended it for the way humans should act. Aristotle said that people should “Aim for the Mean.” He believed too much or too little of something was not good for you. To relate this to nature versus nurture, I use Aristotle’s “Aim for the Mean” theory for my actions in life but I also use it to apply to the answers of unknown questions. I don’t believe people are totally driven by nature or that they are totally driven by nurture. I believe it is a combination of both. I believe people are driven by their experiences in life and their birth-given attributes equally. Proof of this can be seen in the fact that some siblings act completely different as well as people from the same upbringing do not act the same. In the case of Dracula and Frankenstein, I don’t believe just one is responsible for their actions. Nature and nurture are equally accountable. Dracula started to hunt for human blood because he was hardwired that way but he captured Mina because of Van Helsing’s plan to hunt him down. Frankenstein was created as a monster but also felt detached from society because of the way he was treated by people.

3.) Embryonic Stem Cell (ESC) Research is certainly one of those million dollar phrases that has been getting thrown around a lot lately. Is the taking of one life to save another morally right? Should embryos be considered human? How far are scientists going to take their research? What should their boundaries be? These are questions that are constantly being asked and questions that are currently acting as barriers to scientists. Embryonic stem cells are said to have the potential to cure Parkinson’s disease, cancer, diabetes, and even spinal cord injuries. Stem cells are the master cells of the body. Obtaining these stem cells, however, is through the destruction of embryos, which raises many moral questions, especially from the Catholic Church. The other major moral question is pertained to cloning. Somatic cell nuclear transfer is a process where the patient has his/her own cells put into an egg to create an embryo that perfectly matches the patient and the cells he/she needs. This process is the most medically valuable but also uses the same procedure as cloning. Since there are currently no laws against cloning because Congress can’t agree on how far scientists can go, cloning becomes a major concern. It is time to put some regulations in place and let scientists work on this break-through technology. Millions of lives a year can be saved with some successful ESC research. Life is valuable. Why not help people live longer? I understand that the Catholic Church has its beef and that cloning is a bit over the line, but the possibility of ridding the world of some of its most dangerous diseases is something that must be looked into and researched for the benefit of humankind.

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Vampires blog

1. Vampires are most interesting in the Jewish folklore. While they
never appear in any of the canonical biblical texts there is mention of them in mystical writings, most likely of spurious nature. One place they are mentioned is Testimony of Solomon, a text of uncertain origin which tells the story of a boy working on the Temple, who is terrorized by a demon that sucks his blood and takes away his food. King Solomon defeats the demon and later on uses him and a whole order of enslaved demons to help build the Temple. The text should be considered spurious as nothing in the mainstream Jewish tradition suggests existence of demons of this kind. Even if they did building the house of God with their help would certainly present a problem.
2. “Nature” vs. “Nurture” problem goes back to the Greek philosophy
and perhaps even further. Plato believed that people are pre-disposed
to philosophy by nature: his Republic is built on this assumption.
However, nature alone is not enough. It is not enough to find children
who will be future rulers or generals. They need to be educated
(nurtured) in a very specific way. The reverse notion of “tabula rasa”
(i.e. blank slate: everything depends on nurture), seems to appear in
works of Plato’s student Aristotle. Those notions were brought to the
attention of Western civilization by Sir Thomas Aquinas. The question
is relevant today and is often debated not only by biologists,
psychologists, or philosophers, but by legal experts as well. How much
of a role did child abuse play in the formation of the criminal mind?
Or was his genetics a driving force behind the violent acts he
perpetrated? Perhaps, the vampire characters would be considered by
legal experts the same way: are they “evil” because they could not
help it? Because it was in their “nature”, and should we punish them
for it? Or perhaps it was “nurtured”, and thus they bear full
responsibility for their actions, and should be despised and
annihilated without restraint?
3. Cloning, stem cell research, promises of success in eugenics, seem to spell a brighter future for humanity. Would we not want to have juvenile diabetes disappear from the face of the planet? Yet, there is a concern that when we start manipulating life, where do we stop? Embryonic stem cells are not real embryos, however, where do we draw the line? In my opinion, curing dangerous debilitating diseases far outweighs ethical concerns in this particular case (the researches always stress how far embryonic stem cells are away from developing into something real), however one can see the point the opponents are making. Eugenics could in theory help parents create a child the way they want and eliminate possible defects. But what if Dostoyevskiy without epilepsy would not be Dostoyevskiy anymore? How do we know which physical or character traits make us who we are? And how far would that put us from those “experiments” that Nazi’s Mengele conducted in concentration camps?

Vampires...Oh No!!!

Question#1: Cultures around the perceive vampires as a mysterious, evil creature. Something neither human nor ghost. No matter what language a vampire or a creature similar to it has its place in that culture’s history. They vary by shapes, motive or form. For example, Americans believe vampires to be creatures that look exactly like a human, yet have large fangs and the need for human blood; usually acquired by a bite on the neck. In places in Africa, instead of vampires (a.k.a Asanbosam) having feet, they have hooks and choose to drink blood by biting the person’s thumb. In Mexico, vampires (a.k.a Civateteo) are known as witches who attacked children and mate with men to reproduce more vampires. In China, vampires (a.k.a Ch'ing Shih), were believed to not only kill by draining blood, but also by producing poisonous breath. As we can see, no matter the culture, there are stories of this mysterious creature all around the world. On thing that all these cultural believes have in common regarding our bloody friend, is that they all seem to be different from us. They are something unimaginable and can not be killed as we can…therefore reproducing one of our greatest fantasies…the idea of eternal youth and life.

Question#2: Nature vs. Nurture is an ongoing debate, especially among psychologists in trying to figure out what determines human behavior. Is it our biological make-up (our nature) or the environment that we are exposed to (nurture) that determine who we are and how we act? In Dracula, although it may seem clear that he is “evil”, because he deceits, I wouldn’t categorize him as such. First of all (and I don’t meant to digress), in order to determine if someone is evil, we first have to define what evil is. What may seem evil to us may not be for someone else. Dracula did everything to be able to get the most important thing for his survival…blood. The means for which he acquires his “food” could very well be considered evil, but is the fact that he’s feeding to survive evil? Some people think that it’s evil to kill and cut up the pieces of a cow for us to eat…is this biological need to survive evil? No, but this is exactly why Dracula can be considered to be an example of the “nature” side of the debate. This biological need to feed is what makes Dracula naturally inclined to his behavior. On the other hand, Frankenstein was only considered to be monstrous because of his environment (nurture). Because he was seen as such, and treated as such he acted as such.

Question#3: Cloning had developed more now into a delicate topic because of how much our science has evolved. There now seems to be a part of our culture that believes that the role of God is simply to give us strength, but it as no say in the matters of biology, chemistry and physics. Everything that we once believed to be from the “unknown” now has a name, face and cause. This is the main argument for cloning. “We now know what causes X so we can fix it and live longer. So much so that we could even make a replica of ourselves”. I’m not sure how I feel about the topic yet, but my main concern is that no matter how many things we fix, the fixing will never stop because new living organisms are created everyday. There will always be something “wrong”, the only thing that will change is the remedy.

Primal Urges and Fear

The idea of the vampire in other cultures is highly romanticized like the western culture. Asian cultures have the same beauty and fascination as that of their western brethren. They are beautiful, enigmatic and even hold a reverence in Asian society because of their kinship with the dead. Of course there is a fear as well, some may be evil and manipulate the bodies of the victims in carnal ways because they lack the morals of the living. Overall they hold a place in Western and Eastern society, however their place in Eastern society is more out of sacredness and less out of pop culture.

Nature versus Nurture, in the case of animals here is a sense that nature is hardwired to prevent certain attributes to take over for too long like in the case of the violent attack of a chimpanzee in Connecticut. Certain primal drives take over in the case of animals unless it is bred out of them like in the case of certain domesticated breeds even then there is a certain wildness left in their nature- like sniffing a tree for scent or scratching a post. In the case of Dracula and Frankenstein there is a sense of primal nature a wildness that normal humans cannot account for. They are out of our grasps that is what makes them evil- they are something that we cannot control which makes us fearful.

Man playing god is probably one of my greatest fears. I loathe the idea of gene manipulation and making people out of tissue because there is a sense of power and lack of morals. Stem cell research is an area of great debate using tissue of unborn zygotes to create tissue for other human organs needing repair. There is a certain disregard for life, in using such tissue. While there is a certain necessity as heterotrophic beings to assimilate food from other sources in modern times there is no sense of sacredness or offering. I think it like if aliens see what we are doing to our unborn what is stopping them from doing horrible things to us? Recently by Mary Anne Liebert Inc discussed the idea that Animal Somatic Cells were not a good substitute for Human Cells. While currently it is not a good substitute there may be evidence further down the road that they may be and they should still be further studied before we take human zygotes and use them for experimentation purposes.

Existence of Vampire

Question 1: Basically Vampire differs from culture to culture. Vampire does not exist in real word. It is an imagination by human being. Vampires are thought as the shadows of midnight which appeared in the imagination or nightmare. There are some people they believe vampire and most other people don’t believe vampires. It’s an invisible scary thing that always keeps in human mind. Although the common notion behind vampire is of a fictitious revenant that lives on the blood of living human, many different cultures may have their own interpretation of the character due to various spiritual beliefs. No matter how different each culture’s perception may be, the notion of vampire remains mysterious, therefore upholds all human nature’s curiosity regardless of culture backgrounds.

Question2: Nature refers to human being’s innateness, that is what we naturally born with and nurture refers to our physical and behavioral growth shaped by the world. The answer to the question whether the vampire and monster are evil will be no, because they are not born evil. According to the nurture theory, people “think and behave in certain ways because they are taught to do so. ”Also According to Shelley, the natural human beings have their own characteristics since they were born; otherwise, the concept of nurture is how people are influenced by society factors. I agree to some extent that people are not born monsters and do not acquire specific behavioral patterns from previous generation through parents genes. This is the environment which impacts their development. However Frankenstein’s creature is not monster. He does not harm anybody rather he tries to learn something from them by observing their behavior, language etc. So the Dracula with a monster is not accepted by the society.

Question3: According to the ask.com, Cloning in biology is the process of producing populations of genetically-identical individuals that occurs in nature when organisms such as bacteria, insects or plants reproduce asexually. First of all cloning is unethical. Because you are creating human or animal that you have no right to do that. Secondly many physicians, including the American Medical Association, strongly advise against cloning and consider it highly unethical. The success rate is very low. I want to emphasize one point that whether the creation is good or evil, it depends on what man does with it. I just hope that whatever they pursuit to create, those things bring benefits to the society, not to destroy it.

Dracula and Frankenstein

Vampire myths varied from culture to culture. Each culture had its own version of what a vampire looks like. For example vampires from Bulgaria had only one nostril, Albanian vampires wore high heeled shoes, Mexican vampires had a bare skull instead of a head, and Brazilian vampires had furry feet. Some were reported to be able to transform into animals such as bats, rats, dogs, wolves, spiders and moths. This monster holds appeal and dread from one culture to another because they are seen as the return of evil beings, suicide victims, witches, or being bit by another vampire. These beliefs surely would make one afraid of vampires!
The difference between nature and nurture is that nature refers to a person being born with something as opposed to nurture which refers to personal experiences which make the person who they are. Dracula and Frankenstein, both the vampire and monster are considered evil. Dracula was naturally a monster because he used to have evil thoughts from the beginning but used to act nicely to people so he gets what he wants. On the other hand, Frankenstein was nurtured into being evil because he was created ugly and was lonely, but he was not created to be evil.
Some concerns today about "cloning" and creating life to save lives brings up the moral and ethical issues of "man playing god." Man can never play god because we can not create natural life. Cloning is a form of duplicating using cells and DNA. Man can not create a cell out of nothing and transform it into a living being. Cloning in today's world is used for research not for purposes of creating humans without the natural reproduction process which requires a sperm, an egg, and the mother whose stomach bears the baby in the developmental process which takes nine months.

Vampires, Monsters, Cloning...Oh My!

The vampire myth has been in existence since the 18th Century. The concept of vampires, undead beings who prey on the blood of living humans and animals, without using the term “vampire,” has been in existence for a much longer time, such as in ancient Greek, Roman, Babylonian, and Indian mythology. This myth, based on such creatures, is believed to stem from ancient civilizations, whose beliefs were ransacked with myths as well as ignorance to what may realistically follow death. In post-ancient civilization, it is believed that this myth is stemmed from issues such as the error of premature burial, which frequently occurred in Southeastern Europe. Each culture has had a different description of how one becomes a vampire, and how vampires behave, look, consume blood, and how one should protect oneself from vampires. For instance, in Transylvania, vampires were expected to be pale with long fingernails. In Bulgaria, vampires were believed to have only one nostril. Bavarians believed that vampires slept with their thumbs crossed and one eye open.

This myth of vampires has had an appeal to many cultures due to the aspect of their immortality. It seems most people fear death. Many even attempt to avoid the discussion of death because they cannot accept the inevitable fate which is each and every one of ours. The modern culture fears aging, as aging has somehow drifted from signifying wise, knowledgeable, experienced, beautiful, and those to honor and respect and has become something that signifies weak, old, decaying, unattractive and closer to death. So, in combination of the fear of death and vanity, people turn to plastic surgery to make themselves appear more youthful, so when they see their image in the mirror, they are not as forcefully reminded that they have already lived many years. Our avoidance of being reminded of death is one that keeps us from understanding a very significant part of our life, as it is simply natural and a part of the cycle of life. People fear death because they believe it to be the end of themselves, when they in fact do not know what truly occurs after death. There are endless possibilities of what may occur after death, and what it is may not at all be something to fear. That said, the concept of “life” after life, in which the myth of vampires is based on, is one that can have strong appeal to us mortals. The idea of vampires is also romanticized, as they are explained to have an alluring and provocative appeal as in the story Dracula, when the vampire was described to have a musical laugh, honey-sweet breath, ruby red voluptuous lips, and bent over the victim with a sense of voluptuousness. Yet, vampires are also dreaded because their mythical stories describe them to be evil beings. The myth of vampires includes their acting upon sucking the last drop of blood from the living bodies of others, leaving them dead, in order for the vampires to continue their own existence. Another dreaded aspect of vampires is due to them being undead which is of a satanic characteristic. As their ability to exist beyond death is appealing, their way of existence is dreaded.

The vampires, as in Dracula, and the monster, as in Frankenstein, are not evil beings. When considering nature versus nurture, as vampires may be considered evil because they must consume the blood of those who are living, which in turn, takes away the lives of those who are living, this action of the vampires is innate, it is natural as it is the basis of, and therefore, a necessity to their continued existence. Without the blood of those who are living, the vampires will cease to exist. For a being to not take actions to preserve their existence, to not do what must be done to maintain their survival, would be going against their own nature. In the case of the monster, the monster too is not evil. The monster was not conceived as an evil being. It was not in the monster’s true nature to be evil. Because the monster received from others negativity in the forms of fear, violence, and avoidance, the monster was not able to act out with others his natural, warm emotions. The monster’s good nature was not given the chance to be received by others due to his unusual appearance. Due to the monster’s nurture, the way he was treated by others, he developed into an angry, violent, defensive being, who perhaps acted out in preemptive ways and offended before even needing to defend in order to avoid becoming the rejected victim but instead the powerful violator. But, when he was given a moment where he was away from others, away from their negative treatment, away from the stresses and aggravation of fighting and being hurt by others, he was able to be the peaceful, caring person that he naturally was, the person in which he longed to be as it felt right. When not interacting with people, because all who interacted with him treated him negatively, but when observing their kindness that they expressed with each other, he began to feel warm and at peace and wanted to share this same kindness with others. So, he acted out his kindness in secretive ways and, when his acts were noticed by others, he heard them mention out loud to themselves their gratitude for this unknown stranger’s kindness. This gratitude continued to make him feel positive which made him feel to continue to perform acts of kindness. The monster, who only looked like a monster but had a heart of gold, just needed someone to love and respect him.

Due to modern science, the life expectancy of people is much longer than before. Scientists continue to seek ways to prolong life. One concept scientists are researching is cloning and creating life to save lives. This act of scientists can most certainly be considered “man playing God” as they are creating something in duplication which was already created by chance, by nature. Nature is perfect the way it is and should not be tampered with, or modified or enhanced to be made better. When taking a living organism and creating another organism of duplication, perhaps it is not exactly duplicate because all of the elements which were present when the original organism was created is not there when its duplicate was created. Let’s take the well known, or infamous, Dolly scientific experiment gone wrong. Dolly, a sheep with the life expectancy of 12 years, who was the duplicate of a cloning experiment, died at the age of 6 due to lung cancer. She also suffered from arthritis. There are speculations that Dolly lived only until 6 years old because the original sheep she was cloned from was 6 years old when the cloning occurred, so her organs were genetically marked to have a duration of only 6 years of life. In the case of creating life as spare parts for an existing life, the cloned person would too be a living, feeling, thinking individual and should be respected as such. To create a life in order to have extra organs for replacement available when needed is extremely selfish to the duplicate individual. When considering stem cells, which came from fetal tissue or from one’s own umbilical cord, this is not creating life to save one’s own life and does not seem to have any aspects of breaking moralistic ideals. According to the BBC News article, Should Scientists Clone Body Parts, “The anti-lobby insists such a move is a major step towards the complete cloning of human beings.” Perhaps stem-cell research can clone certain needed body parts from one’s own stem-cells found in one’s own umbilical cord, but when it comes to cloning an entire, complete person, human rights enters the picture because this duplicate person is too a person just like the one s/he was cloned from, therefore cloning of people will most likely never occur.

Vampire

1. The vampire ideas have been around the world for thousands of years.Which all started of susperstious beliefs in europe. Therefore it also existed through out every culture, since its beliefs. For example, In poland if a child is born with teeth, its consider vampire. Now offcourse such ideas would also go from culture to culture, since its unique and creature of God people starts believeing its vampire. Which brings a question of whethe its true or not? But in india people believes that if a person is evil spirit and when the time of death comes, Such people's soul would not rest in peace which offcourse brings a attention from religious perspective which people would believe in and consider it as a fact. Which makes the vampire apeal as monstor in such circumstances.
2. Nature is something every human being has. It is how a person is brought up and cannot act but it a person "nature". Every living thing follow a rule to survive and that is nature. Nurture is something we learn as we growing up and gets it from our surrounding. Since Dracula is consider in the text as a vampire from its nature and Frankstein the nurture. Since Frankstein is always seem the monster to everyone because he shows off how evil he is and makes it a big deal out of anything. But thats what he adapt from other monster to show his evil side. On the other hand Dracula is naturally Evil he doesnt show what he is really inside, he learned how to fake it in front of people and put a new face every time he would do something bad.
3. Majority of people nowdays tends to be very religious from outside but deep inside they are the biggest sinner. Our environment and considering we are living in 21st century, where every man is trying to step on to another would definetely makes the statement somehow true on" man playing God." Therefore even the "POPE" is also warning people all over that man is always trying to play God but people cannot play God because how can a man play the creator.

What The headlines Do Not Tell Us...

1) It is amazing how the perspective of vampires change around the world. Geocoties.com provides a list of the different vampires depending on their “nationality”. Ancient Greece and Rome vampires, for instance, are female vampires that often appear in half-human-half-animal forms eating the flesh of their victims in addition to drinking their blood. They can be attacked and killed with normal weapons. Indian vampires are half-man-half-animals. They usually appear as humans with animal features (claws, fangs, etc.) or as animals with human features (flattened noses, hands, etc.) and they are roughly four feet tall. In any form, they are powerful magicians that eat the flesh of their victims in addition to drinking blood. They may be destroyed by burning, sunlight, or exorcism. African vampires, on the other hand, are normal vampires except that they have hooks instead of feet; and they tend to bite their victims on the thumb. Polish and Russian’s vampires appear exactly as normal humans and have a "sting" under their tongue rather than fangs. They are active from noon until midnight. They may only be destroyed by burning them –and when they are burned, its body bursts, giving rise to hundreds of small disgusting animals like maggots or rats. Finally, the culture that presents vampires the same way we believe they are is the Central and Eastern European holding the appeal of the "traditional" vampire described in Dracula.
Interestingly enough, vampires are perceived differently depending on the cultures. Vampires can look like animals, like human beings, or like weird creatures, but they al coincide with the fact that vampires appear at night attacking innocent victims causing fear to people.
2) I do not consider Dracula or Frankenstein evil. They are both presented like monsters, but I do not believe they are. As per Wikipedia dictionary, the nature versus nurture “concern the importance of an individual's innate qualities ("nature", i.e. nativism, or innatism) versus personal experiences ("nurture", i.e. empiricism or behaviorism) in determining or causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits.” Both Dracula and Frankenstein were different to regular people; therefore, they have always been rejected. That rejection made them be against “normal” people causing panic and desperation. I found the following quote from Frankenstein: "I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other.” (http://www.mahalo.com/Frankenstein_Quotes) that quote clearly shows that despite of the outside features of that monster, there were feelings inside of him- love feelings, not evil feelings. Dracula is also confusing since he was always extremely charming and seductive. Every time Dracula appeared in front of his victim, he would attract that victim in an enchanting way. “The fair girl went on her knees and bent over me, fairly gloating. There was a deliberate voluptuousness which was both thrilling and repulsive, and as she arched her neck she actually licked her lips like an animal... I could feel the soft, shivering touch of the lips on the supersensitive skin of my throat, and the hard dents of two sharp teeth, just touching and pausing there.” (http://classiclit.about.com/od/dracula/a/aa_draculaquote.htm). That quote emphasizes the provocative and bewitched way that Dracula used with women seduce them and suck their blood.
3) I have always been against cloning. I used to think that human beings are unique individuals that created by God and that we should not interfere with that creation. I was always referring to cloning another human being. However, after reading many articles about cloning, I am now starting to think that it is not just a bad idea and that it is not always to create another identical person. The purpose of cloning is “supposed to cure diseases or to extend means to acquiring new data to cure diseases.” (http://library.thinkquest.org/J002564F/is_cloning_good_or_baaaaaaad.htm). It allows the replacement or development of failing tissues or organs; as I read in Yahoo! Answers: “if we could clone someone’s heart, we wouldn’t need to have donors as we could just replace his heart with a clone that was in better condition.” There are many reasons why cloning is good; for instance, cloning for medical purposes, cloning animal models of disease, cloning stem cells for research, “pharming” for drug production. Those are wisely ways to use the cloning system. Nevertheless, there are some concerns about the topic. As stated in family.org, “Cloning in the past has led to a high amount of mutations and other problems, such as aging problems and the transmission of rare genetic diseases. Recently, a review of all the world's cloned animals suggests that every animal clone thus far produced is genetically and physically defective.” Consequently, “this is not safe science.” Moreover, going back to my original thought, family.org also states that “One of the fundamental ethical principles of medicine is to respect the autonomy of the individual.” Do we have the right to create another human being? Do we have the right to decide about the life of a person? Many scientists and physicians strongly believe that it would be unethical to attempt to clone humans. Not only do most attempts to clone mammals fail, about 30% of clones born alive are affected with "large-offspring syndrome" and other debilitating conditions (date obtained from the Human Genome Project website). A very interesting article in http://www.activatedministries.org/activated/35.413 remarks that we are created to love and respect our Creator, not to attempt to be creators ourselves. Another insight from the following website: http://www.science-spirit.org/archive_cm_detail.php?new_id=232 affirms my beliefs… “Cloning is tampering with the essence of life. It is morally wrong to artificially create life and we are not advanced enough morally or emotionally to use it for good.” After this very intensive research, I am now back to thinking that cloning is not a good idea, it is unethical, immoral, and truly devaluates human life.
Headlines do not always tell us about the different perspectives of vampires around the world. Headlines do not tell us about these monsters being actually not too bad at all. And finally, headlines do not always tell us the other truth about cloning.

1) Different parts of the world have their own perception or their own myths about vampires. In America, particularly Connecticut and Rhode Island, it was believed that vampires were responsible for sickness and death in a family. They believed that the vampires visited their family member and spread the disease, now known as tuberculosis, to this person. In Madagascar it was believed that an outlaw or the living vampire drinks the blood and eats the nail clippings of nobles. According to www.wikipedia.com the Slavic people believed that the vampire is the undead creature who is considered to be vengeful and jealous towards the living and who needs the blood of the living to sustain its body's existence. I think that people needed some kind of explanation to sudden deaths or certain sicknesses since medical science was not developed.
2) I consider that both the Dracula and the monster are evil, since if we look at their deeds, there is hardly another way to describe them. However, the causes of them being like this are farthest from evil: Dracula was in love with his wife but he found her dead from committing the suicide and the monster was lonely, looking for friendship and companionship but since everyone was afraid of the monster, he turned against his creator. Therefore, we could conclude that the creatures became evil because the world rejected them, so to speak.
3)The problem with cloning surely appears when it comes to advanced cloning, or cloning another life. It is important that partially the process might seem beneficial but from the religious perspective it is wrongful, since we are not prepared to deal with it. According to www.activatedministries.org, proponents of cloning want to usurp God’s role and become creators and gods themselves. Also, the biblical perspective would be that only God has the power to create a new soul or give an eternal life, so people should not make attempts to immortalize themselves by duplicating themselves.

Life without Boundaries

The idea of a Vampire or Vampirism has existed for over a millennia, ancient cultures including Mesopotamians, Hebrews, Greeks and Romans all had tales of demons and spirits which are considered parents to modern vampires. For whatever reason, despite the arrival of vampire-like creatures in Ancient civilizations, the idea of a creature we know today as the vampire originates in early 18th century Southern Europe. In most cases, vampires are thought to be the spirits of evil beings, suicide victims, or witches but they also can be created by a spirit possessing a corpse or by being bitten by one of these beings. Belief in these legends led in some places to mass hysteria and even public executions of people believed to be vampires. This contains elements similar to the Salem Witch hunt known to our western shores.
The causes of vampirism vary greatly throughout different countries. In Slavic and Chinese traditions, any corpse which was jumped over by an animal, usually a cat or a dog, was believed to become one of the undead. In Russian folklore, vampires were said to be people who rebelled against the church while they alive.
The largely questioned debate of the question nature vs. nurture is based on the importance of a persons “innate” qualities which is those and individual is born with pinned against an individual’s personal experiences in their environment in determining differences one’s behavior. This can be applied to the stories of Dracula and Frankenstein. Is Dracula born evil or did his environment cause him to be like this? In society, evil is classified by what popular opinion deems it to be. So if the majority of people disagree with a view or a practice it could be considered evil. I know this is far-fetched but to Dracula the idea of drinking blood is not evil. It is of a necessity and want to survive. He needs blood to continue his way of life, in the same way we need water to continue ours. In today’s society we slaughter animals for various degrees of meat and food; this is in essence the same thing. Frankenstein was created a monster and then abandoned by his creator and in essence the world. These experiences after many hard years turned him into the monster he is today. I feel if he would have been accepted by society and not viewed as a monster, his environment dictated his behaviors. In the end, nurture demonstrates Dracula’s need for blood and Nature shows reason for Frankenstein’s behavior.
The idea of cloning is highly controversial as it should be. Those for human cloning believe that this breakthrough could provide genetically identical cells to replace those ravaged by disease of other extreme problems. Diseases such as cancer, heart disease and diabetes, as well as improvement in burn treatment are areas that would greatly benefit from this new technology. New York University bioethicist Jacob M. Appel has stated “children cloned for therapeutic purposes, such as to donate bone marrow to a sibling with leukemia might someday be viewed as heroes.” I feel that maybe one day this will become standard practice as the cure to all diseases and problems and will lead to human beings being able to live forever. Today though, is not that day and this is a very dangerous and unstable path. Who knows what problems and new diseases will explode from the ashes of living forever or life without today’s diseases? Maybe God doesn’t have a plan for us, we will all have to wait and see.

Vampires: The center of contemporary horror

The Vampire

The history of vampires goes back to the early 18th century in Europe. The myth of vampires began as a simple superstition, popularized through mass hysteria, and grew into the center of modern horror. Within the African society there are various schools of thoughts in regards to vampires. “In West Africa the Ashanti people tell of the iron-toothed and tree-dwelling asanbosam…The eastern Cape region has the impundulu, which can take the form of a large taloned bird and can summon thunder and lightning, and the Betsileo people of Madagascar tell of the ramanga, an outlaw or living vampire who drinks the blood and eats the nail clippings of nobles.” Fast forward to modern myths, in Puerto Rico and Mexico there was a widespread fear of a so-called chupacabra (“goat-sucker") wondering around the streets in the 1990’s. “The Chupacabra is said to be a creature that feeds upon the flesh or drinks the blood of domesticated animals, leading some to consider it a kind of vampire. The "chupacabra hysteria" was frequently associated with deep economic and political crises, particularly during the mid-1990s.”Based on the analysis of the outlook of Vampires in both the Caribbean and Africa with respect to their time periods, I conclude that its perspectives are developed due to its environment. In sum, Vampires are essentially the super creatures of its surroundings. The appeal of vampires, referring to journal of Dracula studies, is its deep mythical beliefs. When vampires were first established they had such an impact on society, commonly known as “mass hysteria.”The mass hysteria grabbed a strong mythical hold on societies around the globe.

Are the vampire and monster "evil"?

The main characteristic of vampires and monsters is evilness. As portrayed in Dracula, specifically in the first part of the excerpt when Johnathan Harker comes to the realization that he is a prisoner and is in shivers as a result. Moreover, the fear is escalated when he see’s Dracula crawl on the wall. This act represents the super-human abilities of vampires which answers the question of why vampires are distinguished monsters. Correspondingly, the monster in Frankenstein instills fear in the hearts of many as well, in addition to causes the death of Elizabeth. In sum, monsters and vampires are portrayed in movies and books in such malicious manors because by their very nature they are evil.

Nature versus Nurture in relation to Dracula and Frankenstein:

Should humans embark on anti-natural endeavors such as the creation of human clones or so-called monsters? According to Thinkquest.com, “Cloning might produce a greater understanding of the cause of miscarriages...lead to a treatment to prevent spontaneous abortions… add to the understanding of genetic” and could treat damage to the nervous system. On the flip side, further referring to ThinkQuest.com, cloning a mass of people will result in diminishing genetic variability creating a population vulnerable to the same diseases, possibly wiping out an entire population. Moreover, the moral argument of this issue includes “man playing god”; similarly, the construction of the monster in Frankenstein is an example of the consequences of “man playing god”. When Victor created the monster, he immediately was frightened by its appearance. He was further frightened by the monster, referring to it as hunting his home. In essence, Victors experience with “playing god” turned out to be sour. For one, there are scientific satisfactions and advancements that result for activities such as cloning and human creation however there are an array of consequences that also comes along with it. “Special humans” have a stigma as it is, such as vampires. Vampires are characterized as un-natural and superhuman. As seen in Dracula, the vampire is characterized as having super-human strength, the strength of 20 men, and the ability to do things such as crawl on walls. In connection with the monster in Frankenstein and the mainstream debate of the morality of cloning, when a “special” creature is given exclusive abilities, there can be extremely hazardous consequences. In conclusion, before society takes leaps towards fully accepting cloning and such scientific advancements, researchers need to extensively do their due diligence and be 100% sure that there will not be any harmful societal affects.

What are some concerns today about "man playing God" when it comes to cloning and creating life to save lives?

Referring to findarticles.com/bnet, on august 19, 2002, the pope makes an announcement about “man playing god.” His main thesis was that it is morally unacceptable to attempt to disrupt the mystery of life. Religion serves as a ground for law and obedience. Religion is the center of morals and hence even those whom are not religious in practice have some kind of moral conscience. Essentially, law was built on the basis of morals and religions hence, if man fully fulfilled the role of god, we as a society will have nothing to look forward to and society will turn into chaos.

On a more scientific end, ThinkQuest outlines the array of effects that cloning may result in. Firstly, if a massive amount of people are created, they will share the same genetic makeup therefore; creating a genetically undiversified population. The dangers of an undiversified population are the risk of population wipeout due to viruses. Secondly, if man is able to custom make humans there will be much appeal to create super-humans with abnormal strength and intelligence allowing the opportunity for a real world account of Frankenstein. Lastly, cloning is an expensive process which in turn will cut money from other projects such as cancer and H.I.V research.

Good and Bad

1. All around the world some cultures tend to believe in vampires and spirits. For example, in China many believe that people who are dead if they did something wrong in their past lives, their spirits roam because their souls did not rest in peace and thus roam around everywhere. In India people believe that vampires come because they did not fulfill their wish in life and thus comes out to scare people who had done something wrong to them. In some parts of Europe in the woods, people believe that ghosts come out and they look scary and weird. They ghost attaches to a specific person and that person becomes the ghost and harm other people. So, thus people all over the world think that there are vampires and they are mostly evil. The monsters hold appeal and dread from one culture to another because the monsters appearance and behavior made them so ugly that they are considered as monsters and makes people dread that that they are “evil”.
2. Nature vs. Nurture is a debatable topic for many years. Nature is a person’s inborn ability such as personality. Nurture is what a person gets from the environment. In Dracula, the vampire even though his personality and appearance seemed very nice outside, he actually was deceiving Lucy. He was a monster inside from the beginning. His nature was like that. But his environment made him to act nicely to people so that he gets the best. Thus the vampire in the story is “evil” by nature. The monster in Frankenstein is considered “evil” outside since his appearance is very ugly. He was created and born ugly. He was not born evil. His environment always betrayed him. He got no care from the environment. So, in the end he turned as an evil person because of the nurture he got from the environment.
3. Cloning is a moral, ethical, and a religious topic. Nowadays people are trying to research more and make clones of animals so that they get the desirable results. Later they plan to clone humans. I feel that cloning is totally wrong because only God has the ability and power to create humans not genetical engineers. So, even though they try to prove that they want to create the perfect human being they will still have some problem with them after they are born. One research by a biologican expertise says that the problem will arise because the clone is a genetic code of an older human being. So, the clone will have similarities to the past human being. So, that means they can not clone a person who will not have problems. Every person born has some problem with them. So, I believe cloning should not be done and they should leave this technique to be done by God only.

I wish life was cut and dry...but alas it isn't.

Growing up in the United States you are surrounded by the legend of vampires from seemingly birth. On Sesame Street there is Count, a harmless, vampire like creature that teaches children to count. Then there is the Ann Rice novel, Interview with a Vampire, which makes them seem mysterious, sexual and not entirely evil. Yet, vampire legends are as old as time itself. In Arabia you can find the legend of Agul, which is a female demon that lives in the cemetery and eats dead babies. In Scotland you can find a version that appears to be a beautiful woman and she lures unsuspecting men to their deaths. In Germany there are babies that become vampires after being weaned and nursing again. These baby vampires eat the breasts off of their family members. In West Africa this monster has iron teeth and leaves in trees. As the legends are passed from country to country and from generation to generation the values of that society are weaved into the legend. The legends that are most familiar today evolved from a Victorian European tradition. Many of these legends have a moral undertone that serve as a warning to people. The monsters are to be feared because in some cases they lure unsuspecting victims to their deaths. It serves as a warning to those who would want to partake in some extra curricular activities – beware.

Nature is based on the premise that behaviors are innate. The behaviors are determined by genetic information. Nurture is based on the premise of tabula rasa or blank slate. All behaviors are then learned from the environment. Concerning Dracula and Frankenstein it is hard to believe that the monsters started off with the tabula rasa. Who would they learn their behaviors from? They do not have parents, village, or community where they could perceive acceptable or unacceptable social behaviors. In Bram Stoker’s Dracula the vampire’s blood lust comes from a place that is deeper – it’s innate. It is from nature – it is the nature that he will behave and operate as a monster. In Mary Shelley’s, Frankenstein the monster lives near villages and learns language and acceptable behavior. One could say that Frankenstein has a blank slate with which he could learn. He learns the names of the villagers, simple every day objects and he learns that he is something to be feared.

Cloning is a controversial topic. The ethical waters are very muddy regarding this issue. It is a case where modern thinking has not caught up with modern science. The Christian church has taken the stance that human cloning, while not illegal, is immoral because life begins at conception. Judaism believes that life begins at birth and the issue is a bit less muddy. Some of the concerns that people have regarding the issue is about an individual’s right to protect their DNA. That is no the only issue but what about an individual’s identity that extends beyond the medical. A person’s dreams, thoughts and experiences help make them unique and individual, and they can not be cloned.

Vampire vs. Monster?

Question 1
Although many of us have seen many vampire movies in our life, the movies that we saw only reflect a certain cultural perception of vampire’s mostly western culture. However many different cultures perceive vampires very differently. Even in ancient times people believed in Vampires. For example in the ancient city of Babylon people believed that if someone suffered a violent death or had an improper burial that person soul will be trapped in a state of uncertainty that will result in them turning into a vicious vampire (Ekimmu) to those that cross it’s path. In Bulgaria a vampire (Ustrel) is thought to be created when, a child born on a Saturday had died without being baptized. On the 9th day of burial the child will rise out of the grave and drink the blood of livestock. In India they believe that vampires (Pisacha) were a personification of Brahma’s (Hindu God) anger at humanity’s immorality. This vampire devoured whole corpses and had the ability to cure diseases if approached in a respectful manner.
I think religion have affected the perception of vampires in many different cultures for example in the western culture a vampire supposed to be harmed by a cross and holy water, these are clearly symbols associated with the Catholic beliefs. However in India a vampire is supposedly created because of Brahma’s anger but this vampire is not evil because it can also cure diseases. Vampires are mostly associated with death that’s another thing that can affect the perception of them by different cultures. Cultures that embrace death might accept them and other cultures might be afraid of them because they’re afraid of death.

Question 2
Evil is such a strong word but in context of the actions of the vampire and the monster they’re both evil. The reason I say that is because if you describe their actions without hearing why they did it or their life story you would agree that only an evil person will do such a thing. However how they became evil is another story. The nature vs. nurture theory plays a big role for these two characters. The vampire who depends on the blood of others to survive could be considered evil by nature because of what it needs to survive, because nature is the qualities that you are born with that’s out of your control. The vampire needs blood in order to sustain life in much the same way we need food, however it’s the way that he goes about getting his food is what make’s him a despicable character. He also uses his power to manipulate and force others to do what he wants.
The monster on the other hand was abandoned by his creator and shunned by the rest of the world. He didn’t know what it felt like to be loved which created the monster within him. The monster became evil because of his personal experiences and the hardships he faced not because of his physical appearance. Therefore the monster wasn’t born evil he learned the trait on his own. Regardless of how the vampire was raised he would still require blood and he would still do despicable acts to get it. Nature is responsible for the vampire evil acts and nurture is responsible for the monster evil acts.

Question 3
Human cloning is it a medical break through or is it one step closer to man wanting to be God? Dr. Richard Seed think’s it’s a medical break through that may someday be able to reverse the process of aging and prevent heart attacks. According to Dr. Seed, people would have safer alternatives to plastic surgery. People would have the ability to change their appearance without using dangerous material such as silicon. Doctors will be able to manufacture fat, bone, or connective tissue that exactly matches their body. People who are affected by dreadful accidents will tend to benefit greatly because their features will be very easy to repair because of the convenience of having a clone. However there are a lot of possible consequences for cloning. Too much in a good thing can become very bad, some anti-cloning coalitions argue that abuse of the ability to clone can result in a black market for clones or a source of cheap labor. Cloning wouldn’t only be used for medical purposes, think about it; wouldn’t you clone yourself if you could? This could result in a worldwide epidemic. Celebrities would be cloning themselves as well as athletes and people will live for much longer periods which would make the world more populated. In conclusion I don’t think the benefits of cloning out weigh the consequences. God created us with the intention that we would someday die and I think cloning is one step closer to violating this principle.

The mysteries character

1. The mysteries character vampires have been known in the world since many years. Vampire is a fake idea of evil which creates human mind and it explore by gossiping. For an example, when I was child I used to listen scaring stories from my grandmother. Most of the time she told me the ugly face blood addicted vampire’s stories. Now I believe this story came from generation to generation in all cultures as a backbone. For this reason, wherever we go in the world we will find a lot of stories about vampires. The vampires are identically varies in the nationwide. In chine’s believe vampires has green or pink hair, Eastern European believes vampires has blood seep from their mouth and nose, Japanese thinks vampires are foxes and Indians believe vampires are very tall with long gown and hairs and nails. The main source of vampire’s essence is human blood and this is the common idea of all nations. Also, other common thought about the vampire is able to change their body shape to anything, flying power, undying power and so on. However, vampires are invisible at day time but very active at midnight which indicates their role in a culture.
2. Nature is what we are born with and nurture is our mental and physical growth which formed by the environment. The question is monsters and vampires evil? It is hard to answer because no one born as an evil, the environment builds a persons character. According to biologist, the human’s behaviors can be accustomed identically to the animal’s behavior. The human baby has the ability to learn and control its behavior as it grew up. The environment teaches him how to behave in a society. As a result it plays an important role to build a person’s character whiter he is acting good or bad. Frankenstein’s story is a good example to support the issue. Frankenstein is the priest of the evil, but he is naturally a good person. He helps the community peoples for their need, but the community people consider him as an evil. As a result the people attacked him unfairly instead of becoming his friend. Same thing also happened with Dracula’s story which refers the nurture concept.
3. There is a debate going on that human playing God’s role to create new life. By the cloning method scientists are creating new clone from the animal cell. They already experiment with some animals such as rats. Previously, people have thought that only God could create the life. By improving the technology and the medicine scientist are now focusing on human clone. They are thinking to create perfect human clone which will use for human body to prevent some diseases. I believe, it not good at all to experiment human clone in the lab because human shouldn’t act like evil.

A monster or a friend ?

1.Vampire, or vampyr, roughly translated “blood drinker” stories have been told for just as long as history has been told. From the ancient Egyptian lore of goddess Sakhmet that was consumed with bloodlust to the modern days of Vlad Tepes Dracula. I found out that one of the biological reasons for believing in vampires is a disease porphyria which occurred frequently in Tansylvania, Romania where most of vampire stories come from. Porphyria is a blood related condition where vital function of blood cells are lost. Resulting rapid tissue damage giving ghastly pallor and enlarged teeth due to gum damage as well, as other symptoms you would find in vampires including drinking animal blood to fight anemia that was associated with porphyria. In ancient Assyria and Babylonia the most feared vampire was Lamastu who would creep into houses at night and steal or kill babies in both cribs and womb as well as bring sterility and nightmares to adults. The Greeks feared Lamia that had a torso of a woman and lower body of a snake a mortal lover of Zeus that was made insane by Hera to the point she would eat her children. In Romanian cultures people would become vampires because of unnatural death, birth defects or even on the day you where born on. Romanian believe are closed to what people fallow now days that been bit by a vampire would make you a vampire in the after life. Modern day vamprire are not as grotesque and in are sexy and mysterious figures of the night as portrait in the book Dracula or movies like Twilight and shows True Blood.

2. From what I see and learned from the nature vs. nurture I don’t think that either Monster of Dracula are “evil” in the way we portray an evil person. The monster had no genetic makeup to fall back on because he was different parts brought together. Now what you would say made both of them “evil” is there actions but can you blame either one the monster was not accepted and people was scared of him and because never being thought better didn’t understand why this was happening to him and was angry. But you could see that he was trying to be accepted by people just wasn’t given a chance. As well as Dracula he was looking for love but because the way he was raised and the environment he was in he was who he was. Both seem just to be miss understood and without actually knowing them would come of as “evil”.

3. While cloning main purpose was to save lives and find cures for major diseases. As in everything else in life us humans are trying to take advantage of it or at least find a way in which we can use it to benefit ourselves. But cloning is dangers with a high rate of deformities as well as premature ageing. Also how do you treat a clone is it in fact a human or a thing. Another fear is that people in high power will abuse these powers to clone themselves can you imagine an army of Hitlers or if some scientist instead of cloning an endangered species decided to clone a dinosaur. Cloning has a great chance of devaluing human life altogether can you imagine you late to meeting and there is a person walking across the street you just hit him with no worries they will just clone another copy of him. But do memories and experiences do they transfer over?

Unique Characters of different cultures

Question 1:
When we study different cultures, we will find that in every culture, there is always one unique character which is blamed for being evil. Vampires, Ghosts, Dracula, these all represent the same unique character. All these characters posse’s unique appearances and are portrait scary. The most common is that none of these characters have shadow and generally has long nose and pointed nails. Back home in our village, we have a story of Ghost marriage. What happened was one of our neighbor’s was a priest and in late night he was returning to his house when a ghost approached him. Ghost appeared in same wired appearance and asked him to perform marriage proceedings for him. He got scared and tried to avoid him so he told him that that day was not good for marriage and after ten days he will perform his proceedings. On the tenth day that priest slept early but when he woke up, he was in his bed but not in his house. The ghost took him to their place. He got scared and made excuse that he forgot the marriage date. Ghost asked him to do all the marriage rituals and he did as he was scared. Once the marriage was finished, Ghost gave him lot of utensils as his wage for the marriage. From that place he said he would like to go home walking and needs someone to show the way to his house. Rest of the ghost took him to the house and he slept. Next morning when he woke up his wife asked him about the utensils? Then priest told the whole story. No one believed him and he told that he know the place where he did the ghost marriage. Everyone asked him to show that place and he took them there. And in real there was lot of things present there which made people to believe the priest. Next day priest found out that all the utensils were from the near by village shopper and he returned him all the utensils. But he told that ghosts never tried to harm him. I would not have believed but my uncle saw the place where ghost got married so I do believe in these ghost and vampires.

Question 2:
Evilness of vampire and monster depends on the way it is observed. As stated in the story of Dracula, the guy was eager to get a kiss from three beautiful women. So for him, those three women were good. Also in the story of Frankenstein, the created monster was soft hearted but his surroundings made him bad. So in my opinion, I don’t think there are necessarily evil but everything depends on how we take them. As in the ghost marriage, they did not harm anyone physically.

Question3:
We all know the issue of cloning is very controversial but I support the ideal of cloning and saving lives. Obstructing this process of cloning is just like restricting people to become creative as well as new innovations. I agree that there are ethical issues attached with it but lot of things in our surrounding which we allow also has same issues but we don’t look on those. For example, a use of internet also has lot of flaws and has even lead to lot of tragedies. Lot of people doesn’t do anything and just keeps them busy on the internet. Similarly the issue of porn on the internet also bears ethical questions. The issue of abortion also has ethical questions but these things are happening and we are not restricting it. So why cloning is opposed? I think to stop the cloning is just like not allowing car makers to make more fuel efficient or luxurious cars.

1. Every culture has its own description of vampire. Even though vampires have different characteristics appearances in different countries, vampires are commonly associated with blood drinking. According to Wikipedia, Chinese vampires are called Jiang Shi which literally means “stiff corpse”. Jiang Shi is reanimated corpse that hops around, killing living creatures to absorb life essence. In Germany, one kind of vampire is called Alp. Alp usually attacks women at night by drinking milk from their nipples to cause them to have horrible nightmares. However, Alp will also drink men and young children’s blood from their nipples. For more examples, Moravian vampires only attack when they are naked, and Mexican vampires don’t have a head but a bare skull instead.
The reason that vampires hold appeal and dread from one culture to another is the fear of dead. People are usually afraid of the thing that they don’t know. Death has always been a mystery. Nobody really knows what will happen after he/she dies. The unknown often expends people’s imagination to make their version of stories. I think this is also the case of vampire.

2. No, I don’t think that vampire and monster are evil or born evil. What really makes us to think vampire are evil? Is it because they kill other living creatures for their own goods or to satisfy their needs? If your answer is yes, then we are all like vampires. Vampires kill other lives to survive, and so do we. We also kill and eat other animals, such as pig, to satisfy our needs. Doesn’t that make us all evil too? On Frankenstein’s case, the monster is not evil either. He was so friendly and helping the villagers. However, people were prejudiced against him and attacked him just because of the way he looks. Who is the really evil monster, the human being or the so-call “monster” creature?

3. The original idea of cloning is to reproduce exact human organ for the needed patients for medical propose. However, people seem to go wild with this idea. Instead of cloning just an organ, some people want to clone a human being to replace their loved one who passed away. There are many concerns come from this idea. Due to the inefficiency of animal cloning and lack of understanding about reproductive cloning, many scientists and physicians strongly believe that it would be unethical to attempt to clone humans. According to evidence, most of clone animals fail and about 30% of clones born alive are affected with "large-offspring syndrome" and other debilitating conditions. If this happens to the animals, the same thing will happen to human too. Therefore, the attempt to clone humans at this time is considered potentially dangerous and ethically irresponsible.

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Evil and Love

1.The mysterious character vampire is only a general idea created by human as a result of seeing and experiencing the uncertainty of nature. Although the common notion behind vampire is of a fictitious revenant that lives on the blood of living human, many different cultures may have their own interpretation of the character due to various spiritual beliefs. In China, vampire is revealed as reanimated corpse that goes around absorbing soul of the victims. In Malaysia, it may also be described as a beautiful young woman who obtains her beauty through active use of black magic. Yet in American culture, Loogaroo is one of the many versions of a vampire that resulted from a mixture of beliefs. However, no matter how different each culture’s perception may be, the notion of vampire remains mysterious, therefore upholds all human nature’s curiosity regardless of culture backgrounds.
2.Nature refers to human being’s innateness, that is what we naturally born with and nurture refers to our physical and behavioral growth shaped by the world. So are Dracula and Frankenstein naturally evil? In Frankenstein, the monster has a hideous appearance created by Frankenstein’s own hands, in order word, technically, Frankenstein is the monster’s dad. If one perceives the monster as an evil creature, then Frankenstein will be dad of the evil. The monster was sadly abandoned by his dad at the day he appeared in the world and never being able to know what is loved by other ever. His evil wasn’t naturally grown from his appearance but by the nurture that he was never voluntary to sink in. On the other hand, Dracula, the good looking young prince took advantage on Lucy in order to obtain the love with Mina. The romantic atmosphere established in the love scene between Dracula and Mina may elicit the reader/audience’s sympathy and admire that cover the truth of Dracula’s “evil” to the innocent, Lucy. In my opinion, Dracula was evil no matter how well he loves Mina.
3.As breakthrough technology develops throughout the years, scientists have reached a new realm of research about cell reproduction and cloning. However advanced and beneficial cloning may seem, the ethical issue remains controversial. Many are concerned with the risk of cloning human being since the success rate of animal cloning experiments is still minimal. Also, if human cloning ever succeeds, how should the cloned person be treated? Whether to grant it the rights of a real person is something that requires thoughtful and in depth consideration. According to individual’s religious belief, some may see cloning to be immoral and against the nature creation. Nevertheless, it is still a remarkable scientific breakthrough that will have its advantages and disadvantages to be arguable on both side of the issue.

Vampires and Monsters

Vampire tales have been around for millennia. It seems that human nature needs to put a face and form to things both blissful and macabre. On one hand, there are angels and cherubs that are all good and holy. On the other, there are devils and witches that are all bad and wicked. Vampires fit into the latter description, obviously.

Although, Bella Lugosi’s iconic image of the buttoned-up count with fangs where lateral incisors should be, isn’t exactly what the whole world thinks of when blood sucking creatures are afoot. In Latin America, the Chupacabra is a creature that comes out at night and sucks the life out of goats and other farm animals. Sightings have occurred in Puerto Rico, Mexico, Texas, and since word of the phenomenon spread in the early 1990s, Russia, too!

Nature vs. Nurture is a term used in behavioral psychology. It asks the question: are you born that way or was it your environment that made you the way you are? Neither nature nor nurture would be indicative of the presence of evil. When discussing this subject in the context of Frankenstein and Dracula, the answer to that question is complex.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein excerpt, in my view, showed that the monster was a monster, but was not innately evil. It was the perception of those around him that made him so. Dracula, however, is definitely more evil in nature. The compulsive blood sucking unique to vampires makes their behavior very difficult to defend, and makes this writer less likely to assume that the world Dracula lived in “made him do it”.

The Human Genome Project (click here) has been trying with limited success to clone animals for a variety of reasons. Chief among them would be the reproduction of human organs for transplants. However, many physicians, including the American Medical Association, strongly advise against cloning and consider it highly unethical. The success rate is very low (for animals) and scientists can’t estimate the severity of mental handicaps that may accompany the subjects in the experiments.

Vampires & Frankenstein

In china they perceive vampires with green or pink hair, in Japan they believe in vampire foxes. Eastern Europe, gaunt and pale vampires with blood seeping from their mouth & noses. In Albania it was beleived that vampires wore high heels. Everyone has different views & stories, it is hard to just have one description around the world.

The universal feature of this monster/vampire is the fear of death and immortality. Since everyone has a different perspective on vampires there are different fears. In Europe, there was a myth of vampires wearing black capes, rise from their graves and perceived as predators, being able to live by sucking blood & being able to turn into bats. This idea is perceived throughout the world. It is also said that if a vampire bites you and sucks your blood there is a chance that you can become a vampire. http://www.socyberty.com/Folklore/Great-Facts-About-Vampires.132723

Are monsters and vampires evil? According Neil Levy, a philosopher; with the research I have done, I feel that it is difficult to say whether monsters or vampires are evil because of cultural differences. Everyone is taught and brought up different. Everyone can have their own version of these stories and come up with their own perceptions of monsters and vampires. All humans acquire all or almost all their behavioral traits from "nurture". All personal experiences come from nature. The nature versus nurture debates concern the relative importance of an individual's innate qualities versus personal experiences in determining or causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits. I feel that just like everyone else a monster or vampire can choose if they want to be good or evil. Yes, it can all depend on how people were brought up and their behavior can reflect from people they have learned from.

Some concerns today on cloning are: that a medical revolution could result from the research, with a wide range of untreatable diseases finding cures. If successful, the technology will have found a massive international business. So this means that if cloning is allowed and all these diseases are created there will be no cures and everyone can get exposed, all because of cloning. I wouldnt want cloning to be done unless its a sure and secure thing. Some other concerns are that if someone needs a transplant and there was a perfect match, would people want to accept it from a human cloned embryo? I think that all opinions across the world will vary, whether cloning can benefit humans or not. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/377122.stm

Being Judged by Appearance

Vampires have been known in many nations from ancient times; however, more vampire myths and stories are found in the countries of the Slavic nations. The best explanation to this is that the very big population of gypsies occupied the area. Gypsies were picking the elements and bits of different nations while they were migrating across the continent. Possibly, this is why most nations have the same perception of these creatures. Vampires are associated with death, and the main source of their essence is blood. They possess powers and abilities, such as the ability to fly, to change in size in order to slip through tiny spaces, or the ability to turn into a bat, cat, and other animals, etc. However, the most special power is eternal life, which without doubt was a leading motivation to join the community of vampires.

The answer to the question whether the vampire and monster are evil will be no, because they are not born evil. According to the nurture theory, people “think and behave in certain ways because they are taught to do so.” The well-know psychologist, B. F. Skinner's, proved that humans are like animals when it comes to behavior. The human’s behavior can be conditioned identically to the animal’s behavior. I agree to some extent that people are not born monsters and do not acquire specific behavioral patterns from previous generation through parents genes. This is the environment which impacts their development. The Creature of Frankenstein is born calm, and because of rejection by the society he became violent. His ugliness makes him hated by people. However, Frankenstein’s creature is not a monster when it comes to the villagers. He does not try to harm then in any away. In contrast, the monster tries to improve the living of the poor family. By observing the villagers, he learns their behavior and language. Still, he is abandoned by people who judge by his appearance. Similarly, Dracula, a monster with human features, is rejected by the society.

The question of cloning was in the air for many years. There is a multitude of different opinions towards this procedure. Without doubt, cloning will allow “infertile couples to have a genetically related child." In addition, new horizons will be opened for people who terminally ill, because by means of the cloned human embryonic stem the doctors will able to cure many once untreatable diseases. However, this is a possibility that the cloning can enforce the idea of “perfect nation,” which was actively promoted by the Nazi Germany in the 20th century. As the result, weak nations can be in jeopardy of being completely wiped out by more powerful nations. The world history witnessed the Holocaust, when approximately six million Jews were persecuted and murdered by the Nazi regime. And we do not want to experience a next genocide movement towards another nation.

Human Beings' Perspectives

Question1:
To many cultures, vampires were defined and known in different ways based on vampires’ characters, and appearance. Some people believe that vampire existed in the life, but others disagree with the existence of vampires and considered it as the unreal imagination. Vampires are thought as the shadows of midnight which appeared in the imagination or nightmare. They can be dreadfully scary and or gentle and kind. There is no evidence to define exactly who the vampires were and what they did to people. So, vampire myths still existed for a long time ago and it was still questioned by many people around the world. Knowing about vampire myths, not all cultures attribute the same characteristics to them. Some vampires can appear in a certain time; meanwhile, others have their ability to exist under any conditions. In addition, some cultures think that vampires are gentle and good, but other cultures think that they are killer and evil. For instance, Italian Stregoni Benefici which was thought as a vampire was an ally against the evil vampires. In contrast, the vampire commonly named “Chi” in the ancient Chinese would go around and consume victims’ life. Even though many people in different cultures only heard the stories about the vampires, they had an image of how scary and evil those vampires are in the time. That’s why whenever people relate to vampire knowledge; they always think that vampires are blood-sucking demons.
Question 2:
It is hard to define whether the monster is evil or not because each of us has different perspectives toward the monster and we also have inadequate knowledge about their lives. In order to get approach this issue, the concept of nature and nurture gets involved to explain the development of the monster’s behavior. According to Shelley, the natural human beings have their own characteristics since they were born; otherwise, the concept of nurture is how people are influenced by society factors. Frankenstein is an example of the conflicts between the nature and nurture. To me, I agreed with the nurture outweighs the nature of monster. For instance, we can sympathize with the monster created by Frankenstein. Naturally, he was a good person, and wanted the community to realize that although he is a monster, he wanted to be treated in a good way as others. However, people around him considered him as an evil killer and attacked him. Instead of becoming his friends, people isolated him from the society, and they didn’t give him any chance to live. Similarly, character Dracula was also treated unfairly, and he was not accepted by many viewers. This point reinforces the nurture conception which reflects to monsters’ behaviors.
Question3:
In the past time, people believed that humans were a creation by an omnipotent. It means that only God had the rights to create the man’s lives. Today, many people think that they replaced God’s roles to create more new lives by cloning. I think that with the developing of medicine, many scientists tried to clone animals and they will apply it on human beings later. This issue is fine because they will have a variety of creation. However, I want to emphasize one point that whether the creation is good or evil, it depends on what man does with it. Humans are imperfect, so we cannot try to create the perfect as we expect. I just hope that whatever they pursuit to create, those things bring benefits to the society, not to destroy it.

Excerpts Dracula and Frankenstein

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Life vs. Death

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Drac and Frank blog

Monday, March 9, 2009

Evil or Not?

What About Count Chocula

Monsters and Cloning

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Vampires blog

Vampires...Oh No!!!

Primal Urges and Fear

Existence of Vampire

Dracula and Frankenstein

Vampires, Monsters, Cloning...Oh My!

Vampire

What The headlines Do Not Tell Us...

Life without Boundaries

Vampires: The center of contemporary horror

Good and Bad

I wish life was cut and dry...but alas it isn't.

Vampire vs. Monster?

The mysteries character

A monster or a friend ?

Unique Characters of different cultures

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Evil and Love

Vampires and Monsters

Vampires & Frankenstein

Being Judged by Appearance

Human Beings' Perspectives

Dracula and Frankenstein

Questions

Course Home Page

Blog Archive