JURISPRUDENCE
Frankenstein and Artificial Intelligence
CORE RESEARCH QUESTIONS
We need to ask the question of who bears responsibility in the eyes of the law when autonomous creations cause harm to society.
When we consider Victor Frankenstein's abandonment of his creation, how does this mirror the modern debates over the accountability of AI developers? (Shelley, 1818; Botting 2018)
We need to ask the question if intelligence, even autonomous, warrants legal recognition.
The creature's plea for rights as a human, or a member of society, can challenge our understanding of personhood, a question equally relevant for advanced AI systems, the same as the challenges for corporations and associations. (Shelley 134-135; Carpi 2019)
We need to ask the question of how communities can balance innovation with protection of rights, both through the viewpoint of ethics and morals but also legality.
Shelley's townspeople rejected the creature, just as society grapples with integrating AI into legal frameworks. (Shelley 1818)
Frankenstein by Mary Shelley serves as a text that lays the foundation for examining the frameworks, both legal and ethical, surrounding the research, development, deployment, and implementation of artificial intelligence in everyday life.
This research explores the responsibility of creators and the intersection of the rights regarding autonomous entities, their personhood, and the accountability of society through the lens of Gothic literature and contemporary AI jurisprudence.
How does Shelley's 1818 narrative anticipate modern legal challenges in AI development and deployment? (Hammerman 2022)
- Duty of care obligations
- Foreseeability standards
- Moral agency definitions
What jurisprudential frameworks can address AI autonomy while protecting human interests?
- Liability attribution models
- Rights-based approaches
- Regulatory governance structures
Methodology
The study involves a close reading of Frankenstein and related texts to extract legal and ethical themes relevant to creator-creation relationships.
A review and examination of newly emerged AI litigation and regulatory decisions across multiple jurisdictions.
The study integrates literary insights with legal scholarship to propose new frameworks for the application of artificial intelligence.
"I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel" — The Creature's words resonate with questions of AI rights, responsibilities, and the moral obligations embedded in acts of creation. (Shelley 134).
Key Implications
1
Developing comprehensive legal structures that acknowledge AI as neither fully autonomous nor purely instrumental requires rethinking traditional liability models. (Carpi 2019)
2
Establishing oversight mechanisms that prevent abandonment scenarios while fostering innovation demands multi-stakeholder collaboration across tech, legal, and policy sectors. (Hammerman 2022)
3
Determining appropriate legal status for increasingly sophisticated AI systems challenges fundamental assumptions about consciousness, agency, and moral consideration in jurisprudence. (Botting 2018)
This research bridges romantic literature with cutting-edge technology and the application of law, demonstrating how narratives illuminate their challenges, and by examining Frankenstein through a jurisprudential lens, we can dive into the questions about innovation, responsibility, and the social contract between creators and their creations. (Shelley 2017; Carpi 2019)
Visual Analysis
The following diagrams illustrate the interconnected frameworks of creator liability, entity personhood, and societal duty as they relate to both Frankenstein and contemporary AI jurisprudence.
Diagrams created by Anthony Liborio Padula to visualize the research framework and thematic connections.
Botting, Eileen Hunt. Mary Shelley and the Rights of the Child: Political Philosophy in “Frankenstein.” University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018.
Carpi, Daniela. Monsters and Monstrosity: From the Canon to the Anti-Canon: Literary and Juridical Subversions. Walter de Gruyter, 2019.
Hammerman, Robin. Frankenstein and STEAM: Essays for Charles E. Robinson. Rutgers University Press, 2022.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: Annotated for Scientists, Engineers, and Creators of All Kinds. MIT Press, 2017.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: The 1818 Text, Contexts, Criticism. Norton Critical Editions, 2021.
Disclosure
Authorship and Original Work
The content of this website, including but not limited to written materials, concepts, and overall structure, is an original work produced by Anthony Liborio Padula.
Fonts, Layout, and Design
The fonts are the result of a collective creative collaboration between Anthony Liborio Padula and Edna Ramos; the visual layout and design elements used on this website are the result of original material created by Anthony Liborio Padula.
AI-Generated Images
The images displayed on this website are generated by ChatGPT 5.1, an artificial intelligence model. These AI-generated images are used as part of the site’s creative and illustrative materials; all elements are authorized or are utilized through fair use.
ANALYTICS
<!-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-2YV6EKDD2T"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-2YV6EKDD2T'); </script>