In Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein, she discusses many of the tensions between the exceptional individual, referring to the monster Victor Frankenstein created, and society. It is easily compared to acclaimed author John Stuart Mill's book, On Liberty. In his novel he emphasizes the importance of a single person, and warns the readers of tyranny of the majority, which is often used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule. It is seen in a scenario where the decisions made by a majority in a particular system put their interests so far above a minority's interest, that it is comparable in cruelty to tyrannical despots and thus greatly criticized.
[...] The idea of the harm principle states that each individual in a society has the right to act as he wants, as long as those actions do not hurt others. If these actions only affect the harmer, society cannot intervene, even if that person is hurting himself or herself.[5] Mill thought that power over individuals should only be experienced if it is to prevent harm.[6] The idea of the harm principle is also seen in various other parts of Frankenstein, including when the monster ran around aimlessly in the country side terrorizing people, and eventually killing William, brother of Alphonse by strangulation. [...]
[...] Analytical paper on Frankenstein In Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein, she discusses many of the tensions between the exceptional individual, referring to the monster Victor Frankenstein created, and society. It is easily compared to acclaimed author John Stuart Mill's book, On Liberty. In his novel he emphasizes the importance of a single person, and warns the readers of tyranny of the majority, which is often used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule. It is seen in a scenario where the decisions made by a majority in a particular system put their interests so far above a minority's interest, that it is comparable in cruelty to tyrannical despots, and thus greatly criticized. [...]
[...] In my opinion I think it is rather coincidental that these two works happen to connect so easily. From Mill's tyranny of the majority, harm principle, society and its link with horrific events, how much power society should have over an individual, and finally the idea of a government either having, or being a harmful weapon when governing its citizens, I think that after reading On Liberty, Mill has some very valid theories, and all that have a place in our governments and societies today have been adequately [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
