This is a common theme in the novels Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut and Frankenstein by Mary Shelley. Both novels show a scenario where knowledge has crossed a line by being used in insensible ways, causing it to become a burden. To use knowledge in a wise way, we have to ask the question; “even though we can, should we?” When this question is given thought, knowledge can be used to benefit humanity. Writer D.T. Max shows this by portraying the story of Neil Harbisson, who could not see in color before he had a cybernetic implant.
This first essay that I read helped me understand the psychological struggle and symbolic meaning of the story. Kachur claims that vital information from the narrator is omitted because it seems not important to readers, but that same information is the one that describes the motives and the challenges presented by the author. This essay really caught my attention in ways that I would never imagine. Kachur argues that the narrator obsession is based in “father-on-son incest”. He supports his idea with three possible hypothesis: first, the narrator was a victimized child that resulted with some psychotic symptoms; second, the narrator is re-enacting his abuse to make the old man feel what he suffered; and for last, the old man is a victim of the narrator´s threat of incest.
What makes the film even more interesting in terms of the plot is that there is a plot twist, where the child psychologist is actually dead. A plot also plays a huge role in the development of the narrative’s characters which causes them to take certain actions affecting the story and the characters themselves (King, 2011). “Story is about originality, not duplication” (McKee, 1997). A problem often presented for creating a new plot is if it is original or
The experiment works at first, sending Charlie to I.Q. levels unknown, but the trial of the human brain failed and he was sent back to his ignoble beginnings. Charlie should have had the experiment because he always wanted to be intelligent like other people, he did not regret the experiment afterward and he accomplished great things for science. One reason why Charlie should have had the
Flowers for Algernon is a story that proves that one who changes themself for someone else, will only make their life worse. In various journal entries, Daniel Keyes wrote in the point of view of the main character, Charlie Gordon, to show the thought process behind his actions to change himself. It goes through the process in which Charlie undergoes experimental brain surgery to become intelligent and raise his IQ by 300 percent. In Flowers For Algernon, Daniel Keyes presents the idea that one should always stay true to one’s self, no matter how difficult life can get because the critics in the world will never be satisfied for who someone truly is. No matter what his IQ was, Charlie’s coworkers never appreciated him for who he was.
One of the characters in this story, George is extremely smart and sensitive but unfortunately been crippled by the government's handicapping program. When George makes intelligent remarks or thinks analytically about situations “every twenty seconds or so, [a] transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains (Vonnegut 33). George’s brain handicap symbolizes a legitimate restriction that the government has placed on his body. By placing a handicap on his brain the government is attempting to make George more like everyone else. George is not able to have unique or creative thoughts without be halted by society.
Daniel Keyes 's science fiction story “Flowers for Algernon” is about a mentally retarded man named Charlie Gordon. Throughout life he hasn 't always been the smart one. He wants to change that, and by doing this he wants to do an operation that will expand his learning and his IQ will triple. Charlie met a mouse named Algernon, Algernon is going through this experiment as well. Charlie 's relationship with Algernon isn 't the best, Charlie 's hated him so much because Algernon kept winning in the test the doctors did with them.
And he hasn 't been eating. Everyone is upset about what this may mean.” (Daniel Keyes 216). This shows that despite his other more calm behavior, Algernon is becoming more and more violent, which later affects Charlie due to how closely linked Charlie and Algernon are because of their search for greater intelligence, as shown in the journal entry written by Charlie on May 25th. “ Everyone identifies me with Algernon. In a way we 're both the first of our kind.” (Daniel Keyes 217).
Popular culture is an essential element of the society and often tends to be criticized as leading the youth towards vile lives, immoral and making them dumber. Few dare to counterattack and say the opposite, supporting the idea that all this new information that surrounds us is actually making us smarter and helping our brains. Steven Johnson, an American popular science author and media theorist, actually argues that the more complex the media has become in the past century, the sharper have the people’s thinking skills evolved. His book, “Everything Bad is Good for You”, published in 2005, wishes to convince the reader of the way the popular culture has become “more complex and intellectually challenging over the past thirty years”, more demanding of “cognitive engagement”, the fragment given focusing on games, like APBA, Dungeons & Dragons or Diplomacy and putting emphasis on their ability to change the way the author’s generation thought, spent their free time and even solved problems. Johnson says that the usual saying “children should read more” is nothing but a “conventional wisdom” example and tries to compare the necessity of reading to the advantages of gaming.
He had based his ideas on Charles Darwins Theory of Evolution (C) and believed that by the process of selective breeding “a highly gifted race of men” could be produced. This could lead to the prosperity of a country as the “unfit” were seen as the cause of social problems such as poverty, crime, violence, urban decay, prostitution, alcoholism and mental diseases such as “feeblemindedness” (2) and, if not taken care of, the countrys resources would be drained. Which is why it became so popular, so quickly among the different countires. Here one can already see that this devastating movement was based on the assumptions of one man as even today most of the science behind eugenics is seen as flawed. Galton went on to promote his ideas at institutions and when he died his idea of Eugenics did not go down with