本論文旨在探討自然與人性的概念，以及兩者之間的關係。自然包含兩種範疇，一是外在的大自然，另一則是內在的人性。大自然與人性皆包含善與惡兩個層面，以及決定何謂善惡的「自我與他者」之間的關係。不同於浪漫主義的看法，本文認為自然是中立的，同時具有創造生命與摧毀生命兩種相對的力量。同樣的，人性也兼具創造性與摧毀性的力量。在《科學怪人》中，男主角維克特的好友、未婚妻、以及父親代表維克特本性當中善的層面，而其創造物則是象徵惡的層面，「自我與他者」之間的關係意指維克特本性中的「人我」關係。而維克特對於「人我」關係的態度是影響其本性是否能維持完整的關鍵。
然而，維克特無法理解人性與自然的真正意涵，以為只有完全摧毀他所認為的惡的層面─也就是其創造物，才能建構出他的自我，忽略了「自我」的存在是奠基於與「他者」之間的關係。因此，當他試圖摧毀其創造物時，不但傷害了惡的層面，也損害了「人我」關係，進而破壞了人性的完整性。本文將探討維克特毀滅自我的過程，最後並提出維持自我完整性的方法，即為保持並享受人性中善良的層面，接受人性中邪惡的另一面，並且與他者保持和諧良好的關係。

This thesis aims to inspect the notion of Nature and human nature as well as the connection between them. Nature manifests itself in two domains: the external Nature and the internal human nature. Both Nature and human nature contain two vital aspects, good and evil, as well as “Self-Other” relationship, which defines the concepts of good and evil. Unlike what the Romantics believe, Nature is neutral, with power to both give life and take life away. Likewise, human nature also includes creative and destructive forces. In Frankenstein, Clerval, Elizabeth, and Alphonse represent the good aspect of Victor’s nature while the Creature he makes embodies the evil part of it. Additionally, “Self-Other” relationship, in Victor’s case, refers to “Self’s” relations with “Other” in his nature. Victor’s attitude towards this “Self-Other” relationship affects his maintenance of the fullness of his human nature.
Victor fails to recognize the essence of human nature and attempts to destroy the Creature, whom he equates with evil, due to his misunderstanding that only after the evil part of human nature is gone is he able to construct his “Self.” He does not realize that “Self” cannot exist alone without “Other.” Therefore, when Victor attempts to remove the Creature from his life, he is actually harming the evil aspect and “Self-Other” relationship of his nature. To trace the process of Victor’s self-destruction, I will discuss the gradual disappearance of the fullness of his nature. Finally, I propose that a solution to maintain one’s selfhood is to preserve and enjoy the good aspect of human nature, to accept the evil part of it, as well as to respect and keep a harmonious relationship with other beings.

Abrams, M. H. The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition. London, Oxford, and New York: Oxford UP, 1953.
Alexander, Meena. “Unnatural Creation.” Women in Romanticism: Mary Wollstonecraft, Dorothy Wordsworth, and Mary Shelley. Savage, MD: Barnes & Noble, 1989. 127-46.
Augustine, Saint. The City of God. Trans. Marcus Dods. St. Augustin’s City of God and Christian Doctrine. Ed. Philip Schaff. Grand Rapids: Christian Classics Ethereal Library, 2005. 15 Feb. 2006 <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.html>
Baldick, Chris. “The Politics of Monstrosity.” Botting 48-67.
---. “Tales of Transgression, Fables of Industry: Hoffmann, Hawthorne, Melville, and Gaskell.” In Frankenstein's Shadow: Myth, Monstrosity, and Nineteenth-century Writing. Oxford and New York: Clarendon P and Oxford UP, 1990. 63-91.
Bann, Stephen, ed. Frankenstein, Creation, and Monstrosity. London: Reaktion, 1994.
Bloom, Harold, ed. Mary Shelley. New York: Chelsea, 1985.
Botting, Fred, ed. Frankenstein: Mary Shelley. Houndmills: Macmillan, 1995.
Bronfen, Elisabeth. “Rewriting the Family: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in its Biographical/Textual Context.” 1-38.
Brooks, Peter. “What is a Monster? (According to Frankenstein).” Botting 81-106.
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Ed. M. H. Abrams. 7th ed. Vol. 2. New York and London: Norton, 2000. 422-38.
Crook, Nora. Introduction. Mary Shelley’s Literary Lives and Other Writings. Ed. Tilar Mazzeo. Vol. 1. London: Pickering & Chatto, 2002.
Eilenberg, Susan. “Nothing’s Namelessness: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” The
Faces of Anonymity: Anonymous and Pseudonymous Publications from the
Sixteenth to the Nineteenth Century. Ed. Robert Griffin. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. 167-92.
Elwes, R. H. M., trans. “Spinoza’s Correspondence.” Philosophy of Benedict de Spinoza. New York: Tudor, 1936. 279-426.
Foucault, Michel. “Chapter III: The Insane.” Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. Trans. Richard Howard. London: Routledge, 1995. 65-84.
“Frankenstein.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 4 Jan. 2007 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein>
“Frankenstein’s Monster.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 4 Jan. 2007 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein's_monster>
Goodwin, Sarah Webster. “Domesticity and Uncanny Kitsch in ‘The Rime of the
Ancient Mariner’ and Frankenstein.” Tulsa Studies in Women's Literature
10:1 (1991): 93-108.
Hall, Jean. “Frankenstein: The Horrifying Otherness of Family.” Essays in
Literature 17 (1990): 179-89.
Halberstam, Judith. “Gothic Surface, Gothic Depth: The Subject of Secrecy in Stevenson and Wilde.” Skin Shows: Gothic Horror and the Technology of Monsters. Durham: Duke UP, 1995. 53-85.
Hogle, Jerrold E. “Otherness in Frankenstein: The Confinement/Autonomy of Fabrication.” Botting 206-34.
Horton, Rod W. and Vincent F. Hopper. “Chapter 19: Rationalism and Romanticism.” Backgrounds of European Literature: The Political, Social, and Intellectual Development behind the Great Books of Western Civilization. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1975. 338-67.
James, Louis. “Frankenstein’s Monster in Two Tradition.” Bann 77-94.
Jordanova, Ludmilla. “Melancholy Reflection: Constructing an Identity for Unveilers of Nature.” Bann 60-76.
Kayser, Wolfgang Johannes. “An Attempt to Define the Nature of the Grotesque.” The Grotesque in Art and Literature. Trans. Ulrich Weisstein. New York: Columbia UP, 1981. 179-89.
Kiely, Robert. “Frankenstein.” Bloom 65-80.
Lau, Beth. “‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’ and Frankenstein.” Samuel Taylor
Coleridge and the Sciences of Life. Ed. Nicholas Roe. Oxford: Oxford UP,
2001. 207-23.
Markley, A. A. Introduction. Mary Shelley’s Literary Lives and Other Writings. Ed. Pamela Clemit and A. A. Markley. Vol. 4. London: Pickering & Chatto, 2002.
Mellor, Anne K. “Choosing a Text of Frankenstein to Teach.” Frankenstein: A Norton Critical Edition. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York and London: Norton, 1996. 160-66.
Melville, Herman. Moby Dick. Ed. Tony Tanner. New York: Oxford UP, 1988.
Minot, Leslie Ann and Walter S. Minot. “Frankenstein and Christabel: Intertextuality, Biography, and Gothic Ambiguity.” European Romantic Review 15.1 (2004): 23-49.
Nadler, Steven. Spinoza's Ethics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006.
“Nature.” Def. EncyclopÆdia Britannica. 1970 ed.
“nature.” Def. Oxford English Dictionary Online. 2007. 20 Mar. 2007 <http://dictionary.oed.com/>
Nelson, Lowry, Jr. “Night Thoughts on the Gothic Novel.” Bloom 31-48.
Newman, Beth. “Narratives of Seduction and the Seductions of Narrative: The Frame Structure of Frankenstein.” ELH 53 (1986): 141-61.
Olorenshaw, Robert. “Narrating the Monster: From Mary Shelley to Bram Stoker.” Bann 158-76.
Porter, Carolyn. “Call me Ishmael, or How to Make Double-Talk Speak.” New Essays on Moby-Dick. Ed. Richard H. Brodhead. London: Cambridge, 1986. 73-108.
Reichardt, Jasia. “Artificial Life and the Myth of Frankenstein.” Bann 136-57.
Rieger, James. “Frankenstein; or, the Modern Prometheus.” Bloom 49-56.
“Romanticism.” Def. The New Encyclopædia Britannica. 15th ed. 2003.
Roth, Leon. Spinoza. London: Ernest Benn, 1929.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality among Men. Trans. G. D. H. Cole. Constitution Society Home Page. 20 Mar. 2007 <http://www.constitution.org/jjr/ineq_04.htm>
Schoene-Harwood, Berthold. “About Man-Making: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.”
Writing Men: Literary Masculinities from Frankenstein to the New Man.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2000. 5-20.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: A Norton Critical Edition. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York and London: Norton, 1996. 1-156.
---. Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus. Four Gothic Novels. Oxford and New York: Oxford UP, 1994. 461-606.
Sherrill, Rowland A. “The Career of Ishmael’s Self-Transcendence.” Herman Melville’s Moby-Dick. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1986. 73-95.
Sherwin, Paul. “Frankenstein: Creation as Catastrophe.” Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1987. 27-54.
Smith, Crosbie. “Frankenstein and Natural Magic.” Bann 39-59.
Spark, Muriel. “Frankenstein.” Bloom 11-30.
Spinoza, Benedictus de. The Ethics. Philosophy of Benedict de Spinoza. Trans. R. H. M. Elwes. New York: Tudor, 1936. 39-278.
Stevenson, Robert Louis. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Raleigh, N.C.: Alex Catalogue. NetLibrary. 4 Jan. 2007 <http://www.netlibrary.com/>
Walling, William A. “Victor Frankenstein’s Dual Role.” Bloom 57-64.
Willis, Martin. “Frankenstein and the Soul.” Essays in Criticism 45.1 (1995): 24-35.
Wordsworth, William and Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Lyrical Ballads. Ed. R.L. Brett and A.R. Jones. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge, 1991.