How does Frankenstein challenge human exceptionalism?
Author: Martin Munyao Muinde
Email: ephantusmartin@gmail.com
Introduction
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) is often interpreted as a seminal text that interrogates the boundaries of human identity, knowledge, and morality. While the novel has traditionally been read through the lenses of Romanticism and Gothic horror, it also functions as a profound critique of human exceptionalism. Human exceptionalism refers to the belief that human beings possess unique qualities, such as rationality, moral superiority, or dominion over nature, which set them apart from and above all other forms of life. This ideology, deeply rooted in Enlightenment thought and Christian theology, has historically shaped human attitudes toward science, technology, and the environment. Shelley, however, complicates this narrative by presenting the Creature as a being who destabilizes conventional definitions of humanity and questions the superiority of human reason, morality, and creativity.
The purpose of this essay is to analyze how Frankenstein challenges human exceptionalism by interrogating the boundaries between human and nonhuman existence. It will examine how the novel critiques assumptions about rationality, creativity, morality, and social superiority that have historically underpinned human exceptionalism. Through its exploration of Victor Frankenstein’s scientific ambition and the Creature’s struggle for recognition, Shelley reveals the fragility of human-centered worldviews and exposes the consequences of excluding nonhuman others from the sphere of moral consideration.
Science, Creation, and the Fragility of Human Superiority
One of the central ways Frankenstein challenges human exceptionalism is through its reimagining of creation and the origins of life. Traditionally, human exceptionalism has been grounded in the belief that humanity occupies a unique position as the pinnacle of God’s creation. Enlightenment thinkers reframed this idea through rationalist frameworks, emphasizing human mastery over nature through science and reason (Porter, 2001). Victor Frankenstein embodies this Enlightenment ambition by attempting to transcend natural limitations and rival divine creation. His pursuit of animating lifeless matter demonstrates the Enlightenment confidence in human superiority and the belief that science could elevate humanity to godlike status.
Yet Shelley undermines this vision by portraying Victor’s creation as a direct challenge to human uniqueness. The Creature, though not born of natural processes, demonstrates intelligence, rationality, and emotional depth, qualities often considered the exclusive domain of human beings. His very existence calls into question the assumption that humanity holds an exclusive claim to rational thought or creative capacity. Shelley thereby destabilizes human exceptionalism by suggesting that the qualities once thought to define human superiority can be replicated or even exceeded by nonhuman entities. This confrontation with artificial life exposes the fragility of human exceptionalist claims, highlighting the possibility that humanity’s uniqueness is less absolute than previously assumed.
Rationality and the Creature’s Intellectual Capabilities
Human exceptionalism has often been justified through claims about human rationality and intellectual supremacy. Philosophers from Aristotle to Descartes argued that reason set humans apart from animals and other forms of existence. In Frankenstein, Shelley directly engages with this discourse by presenting the Creature as a rational being capable of reflection, learning, and eloquence. His self-education, which includes reading works such as Milton’s Paradise Lost, Goethe’s The Sorrows of Young Werther, and Plutarch’s Lives, demonstrates a capacity for abstract thought, moral reasoning, and aesthetic appreciation (Shelley, 1818).
The Creature’s rational faculties challenge the assumption that reason is an exclusively human trait. His ability to articulate his suffering and critique human cruelty undermines the foundations of human exceptionalism, suggesting that rationality is not sufficient grounds for human superiority. Furthermore, his intellectual development illustrates the Enlightenment belief in education as a transformative force, yet Shelley uses this motif to question whether rational education inherently justifies human exceptionalist claims. If rationality can emerge in nonhuman beings, the distinction between human and nonhuman becomes porous, destabilizing long-held hierarchies of superiority. By granting the Creature rational voice and intellectual agency, Shelley subverts the ideology of human exceptionalism and invites readers to reconsider the ethical boundaries of humanity.
Morality, Ethics, and the Question of Humanity
Beyond rationality, human exceptionalism has often been tied to claims about moral superiority. Humans have traditionally been regarded as uniquely capable of moral judgment, distinguishing right from wrong in ways beyond the capacity of other beings. In Frankenstein, Shelley complicates this narrative by presenting the Creature as more morally reflective than Victor himself. The Creature demonstrates an initial inclination toward benevolence, helping the De Lacey family in secret by gathering firewood and refraining from stealing their food despite his hunger. His moral sensibility emerges naturally, not through divine origin but through observation and empathy.
Victor, by contrast, exhibits profound moral negligence. His refusal to take responsibility for his creation and his failure to provide the Creature with guidance or compassion reveal his ethical shortcomings. While Victor embodies Enlightenment rationalism, he neglects the moral dimension of his actions, thereby undermining claims of human moral superiority. The Creature’s demand for a companion also reflects a deeply moral appeal to justice, reciprocity, and compassion. He argues that he deserves happiness and dignity, drawing upon principles of fairness that resonate with Enlightenment ideals of human rights. By juxtaposing the Creature’s moral awareness with Victor’s moral failure, Shelley challenges the notion that humans are inherently more ethical than nonhuman entities, thereby destabilizing human exceptionalist frameworks.
The Social Dimension of Human Exceptionalism
Human exceptionalism has also been reinforced by social structures that privilege human community as the exclusive sphere of moral and political life. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, for example, emphasized the social contract as a foundation for human society, while other Enlightenment thinkers celebrated civilization as evidence of human progress (Kant, 1784). In Frankenstein, Shelley interrogates this social aspect of human exceptionalism by dramatizing the exclusion of the Creature from human community. Despite his rationality, morality, and longing for companionship, the Creature is consistently rejected by humans on the basis of his physical difference.
This exclusion reveals the arbitrary foundations of human community and challenges the assumption that social membership is inherently tied to moral worth. The De Lacey family, whom the Creature admires, initially embody Enlightenment ideals of benevolence and hospitality, yet they reject him violently once confronted with his appearance. By showing how social prejudice overrides rationality and morality, Shelley exposes the limitations of human exceptionalist thinking. The Creature’s exclusion suggests that human society constructs its sense of superiority not through genuine qualities but through arbitrary distinctions rooted in fear and prejudice. This critique reveals the fragility of human exceptionalism and calls for a reconsideration of the boundaries of community and moral obligation.
Nature, Nonhuman Life, and the Challenge to Human Dominance
Another dimension in which Frankenstein challenges human exceptionalism is through its portrayal of nature and nonhuman life. Enlightenment thought often positioned humanity as master over nature, celebrating science and reason as tools to dominate and manipulate the natural world. Victor Frankenstein exemplifies this attitude by seeking to unlock the secrets of life itself and assert mastery over natural processes. His attempt to conquer death reflects the human desire to transcend natural limitations and assert superiority over the organic order.
However, Shelley undermines this narrative by illustrating nature’s resistance to human control. Victor’s experiment ultimately spirals out of his command, producing unintended consequences that destroy his life and family. The novel repeatedly emphasizes the sublime power of nature, from the Alpine landscapes to the icy expanses of the Arctic, which dwarf human ambition and remind readers of humanity’s vulnerability. The Creature himself, though a product of human manipulation, becomes a figure of nonhuman agency, destabilizing the boundary between humanity and nature. By foregrounding the limits of human mastery and emphasizing the vitality of nonhuman existence, Shelley critiques the human exceptionalist assumption of dominion over the natural world.
Deconstructing Human Identity and the Anthropocentric Worldview
At its core, Frankenstein destabilizes anthropocentrism, the worldview that places humanity at the center of moral and existential significance. Human exceptionalism is closely tied to anthropocentrism, as it assumes that humanity occupies a privileged position in the cosmos. The Creature’s existence disrupts this worldview by demonstrating that the qualities used to define humanity—rationality, morality, creativity, and sociability—are not uniquely human. His hybridity destabilizes essentialist definitions of human identity, suggesting that the boundary between human and nonhuman is fluid rather than fixed.
Shelley’s text anticipates later philosophical critiques of human exceptionalism, including posthumanist and ecological perspectives that challenge anthropocentric hierarchies (Wolfe, 2010). By depicting the catastrophic consequences of Victor’s anthropocentric hubris, Shelley exposes the dangers of centering human superiority at the expense of responsibility and humility. The novel’s critique of human exceptionalism thus extends beyond its historical context, offering insights into contemporary debates about artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and environmental ethics. In showing that humanity’s defining traits can be mirrored or exceeded by nonhuman beings, Shelley dismantles the ideological foundation of human exceptionalism and compels readers to rethink the ethical scope of human-centered worldviews.
Conclusion
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is more than a Gothic tale of horror; it is a profound philosophical engagement with the ideology of human exceptionalism. By dramatizing the consequences of Victor Frankenstein’s attempt to transcend natural limits, Shelley interrogates the claims of human superiority grounded in rationality, morality, creativity, and social community. Through the Creature’s rational capabilities, moral awareness, and desire for companionship, Shelley destabilizes assumptions about human uniqueness and exposes the fragility of anthropocentric hierarchies. Moreover, the novel highlights the ethical and ecological consequences of human hubris, revealing the dangers of treating humanity as the center of all value.
In challenging human exceptionalism, Frankenstein anticipates modern critiques of anthropocentrism and invites readers to consider broader frameworks of moral inclusion that transcend the boundaries of species and form. Shelley’s novel demonstrates that the qualities traditionally celebrated as uniquely human can emerge in nonhuman beings, thereby dismantling the ideological foundations of human superiority. Ultimately, Frankenstein compels us to confront the ethical implications of our assumptions about humanity and to envision new possibilities for coexistence, responsibility, and humility in a world where the boundary between human and nonhuman is far less absolute than human exceptionalism has claimed.
References
Kant, I. (1784). An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? Translated by H. B. Nisbet. Penguin Classics.
Porter, R. (2001). The Enlightenment. Palgrave Macmillan.
Shelley, M. (1818). Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor & Jones.
Wolfe, C. (2010). What is Posthumanism? University of Minnesota Press.