Frankenstein chapter summaries

Chapter 2

Description of Elizabeth (kind, generous, womanly) and Henry Clerval (enthusiastic for all sorts of experiences); also Victor’s growing obsession with natural philosophy.

Chapter 3

Elizabeth catches scarlet fever, in nursing her Victor’s mother dies; he goes off to university to pursue his obsession despite his professors’ disdain.

Chapter 4

Victor becomes obsessed with the idea of defeating death and disease; collects body parts to create life meanwhile rejecting his previous life, interests, health and even sleep.

Chapter 5

He animates his creation, is horrified by it and runs away from it. It pursues him till he runs into Clerval who looks after him for several months as he has a breakdown.

Chapter 6

Victor receives a letter from Elizabeth reminding him of his family and responsibilities. Justine introduced and her background as a lovely, decent and upstanding woman.

Chapter 7

Victor receives a letter from his father telling him his brother William has been murdered. Victor travels home. On his way he catches sight of the monster during a dramatic storm. Upon arrival at home his brother Ernest tells him the murderer has been discovered – it is Justine.

Chapter 8

At the trial the evidence is produced – a picture hidden in the pocket of her dress and her absence on the night of the crime. She confesses (afraid of the consequences for her soul) and is hanged despite Elizabeth’s plea on her behalf.

Chapter 9

Victor falls into a deep depression.

Chapter 10

One day while out walking in the mountains the monster approaches him and begs him to listen to his story.

Chapter 11

The monster describes how rejected by his creator he wandered lonely and naked until he found a cloak to cover himself, fire to warm himself, food to feed himself and finally a family to spy upon and learn about the world. Including in his first encounter with other humans their fear and contempt for him when some villagers threw stones at him to drive him away.

Chapter 12

He learned about kindness.

Chapter 13

He learns to read and to talk by listening in on the old man teaching the young Arabian woman.

Chapter 14

He learns about selflessness and high ideals.

Chapter 15

He concocts a plan to be taken in by these kind folk. He is shocked by the violence of their rejection of him.

Chapter 16

In revenge he destroys their now abandoned home and wandering aimlessly he encounters first a young girl whom he saves from drowning in the river but is thanked with a bullet by her young man and then what turns out to be Victor’s young brother whom he inadvertently kills when he refuses to accompany him. He plants evidence of the crime on Justine and flees the scene.

Chapter 17

Now he asks – demands – that Victor make him a mate.

Chapter 18

Victor’s father suggests he and Elizabeth get married soon. He says he must go to England first.

Chapter 19

Victor and Clerval tour England then part company in Scotland from where Victor travels to the Orkneys, hires a cottage and proceeds to make the monster’s mate.

Chapter 20

On seeing the monster spying on him Victor in a frenzy tears up the mate. Upon leaving the island he is arrested for the murder of Henry Clerval.

Chapter 21

He has another breakdown. After 3 months in prison his father arrives and Victor is found to be innocent.

Chapter 22

They return to Geneva. Eventually he and Elizabeth are married.

Chapter 23

Elizabeth is murdered on their wedding night by the monster. Once again Victor is exonerated by the law.

Chapter 24

And Victor sets off around the world in pursuit where finally we end where we started and he meets Walton.

The teleological argument a summary

This argument needs its premises and conclusion properly stated. Viz:

Premise – There is evidence of order in nature

Premise – If there is order and not random chaos then this indicates that it has been designed and that it has a purpose

Conclusion 1 – There must therefore be a designer

Conclusion 2 – That designer must be God

 

It is worth explaining the watch analogy fully and then explaining that the analogy Paley drew was that if the watch showed evidence of a designer so much more so does the universe.

You could also here explain here and describe some of the interdependent systems in the universe or even here on planet earth e.g. weather systems and their effect on climate and the land, tectonic plates and recycling of the atmosphere, plants and their essential place in keeping CO2 levels down, animals and plants and the food chain etc think of your own from your own knowledge.

What therefore is the likelihood that just the right conditions came about randomly and allowed human life to develop on the planet? Too much, too little oxygen, not enough too much CO2, just the right balance of other chemicals, predators, minerals, gravity etc THIS IS A STRENGTH FOR THIS ACCOUNTS FOR WHY THINGS ARE THE WAY THEY ARE.

Of course the detractors would say that if it was any other way we wouldn’t know any different. And any way any chance is better than zero! Lottery players know this!

The aesthetic argument which is a variant of this one expresses the belief that the fact that the planet is beautiful, sunsets, landscapes etc is sufficient proof of an intelligence behind the design of the universe, after all if it was all just random chance why would it be beautiful, beauty is not a necessary survival trait, in fact it can be a disadvantage, so there must be a good reason. This would imply that it has been designed in from outside and theists would say this is evidence of God and that from this fact of beauty we can extrapolate that God is good.. THIS IS A STRENGTH BECAUSE IT EXPLAINS WHY THIS WORLD IS BEAUTIFUL.

HOWEVER THIS IS ALSO A WEAKNESS BEAUSE this world is plenty ugly too! And what does this say about God?

The anthropic principle as advocated by Tennant and Swinburne asserts that this world indeed this universe with the express purpose of giving rise to the human race, that the human race is the pinnacle of the universe’s achievement. THIS IS A WEAK ARGUMENT BECAUSE one IT IS VERY EGO OR MAN CENTRED, two WHY IS THE UNIVERSE SO BIG IF THAT IS ALL IT IS FOR AND three WHO KNOWS WHAT WE MAY DISCOVER ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE IN THE FUTURE? though Swinburne’s belief in evolution as the mechanism for that process and development is an attractive one because Science and Evolutionary theory are given their place within the theistic argument.

THE STRENGTHS of this being an a posteriori argument lie within the fact that it is based on evidence, we can see for ourselves the strength and legitimacy of this argument’s claims.

Another STRENGTH could be the fact that it is inductive in that it is based on observation and a generic principle is drawn from the particular to the general. This might be alright if we are discussing the observed fact that all tigers that we have seen so far have stripes and therefore it seems logical to postulate that to be a tiger means to have stripes but is a WEAKNESS when extrapolating from the available evidence – from the fact of the watch’s existence to the need for a watch maker to from the fact of the universe’s existence to the existence of the universe maker i.e. God.

From this you can go to the idea of the flawed watchmaker to the flawed universe maker and the possibility that the universe isn’t as perfect as some would have us believe and if it is then the analogy cannot hold up under scrutiny because the watch and the universe are completely different categories and one cannot be compared with the other!

The fact that this analogy seems logical is a STRENGTH. THE WEAKNESS lies in the suggestion by Hume that the analogy is stretched too far.

A posteriori arguments are generally regarded as STRONG because they are based on evidence but (WEAKNESS) how complete is our evidence or our observations, Kant and Hume would say our knowledge is incomplete and it makes no sense to posit a designer based on our limited experience of design; modern chaos theory seems to lend support to their view!

When assessing the overall effect of the argument consider the weight of accumulated ‘evidence’; even if no single argument like the cosmological argument or the teleological can necessarily prove the existence of God maybe when weighed together their strengths outweigh their weaknesses.