《失乐园》《弗兰肯斯坦》和《机械姬》中的科学普罗米修斯主义
|
摘要
史诗《失乐园》、小说《弗兰肯斯坦》和电影《机械姬》放到一起看,都强调了科学普罗米修斯主义的严重问题,指出人类知识应有界限。人工智能是人类知识进步的最新形式,科学伦理学或人文价值要求限制和控制人工智能的发展,如果不是完全禁止或停止的话,科学家理应采取谨慎负责的态度。狂热地、过分地追求知识,通常是人类,以便像上帝一样,创造出类人生物,这是科学普罗米修斯主义的基本特征,它会带来毁灭性的灾难。《弗兰肯斯坦》和《机械姬》都浸透了现代精神,都对作为现代性特征的科学普罗米修斯主义进行了有力批判,其批判手段是揭露人工智能对人类和文明生存造成的真正威胁。弥尔顿史诗《失乐园》对普罗米修斯主义的经典讨论为《弗兰肯斯坦》和《机械姬》提供了认识论框架。本文结论认为,科幻小说和科幻电影中科学和艺术的联姻能够结出硕果。
This essay discusses John Milton's Paradise Lost, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and the contemporary film Ex Machina as a coherent group concerning the boundaries of knowledge and the perils of scientific Prometheanism. The development of AI(Artificial Intelligence) must be delimited and contained, if not curtailed or banned, and scientists ought to proceed in a responsible and cautious manner. An obsessive or excessive pursuit of knowledge, usually a human's, in the direction of equaling God and creating humanoid beings constitutes the essential feature of scientific Prometheanism, which can end in catastrophic destructions. Both Frankenstein and Ex Machina are modern in spirit and make a pungent critique of an aspect of modernity, i.e. scientific Prometheanism with an exposition of the real dangers posed by AIs to the very existence of humanity and civilization. The classical discussion of Prometheanism in Milton's Paradise Lost provides the epistemological framework for Frankenstein and Ex Machina. The article concludes that the union of science and arts in science fiction/films can be very productive.
This essay discusses John Milton's Paradise Lost, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and the contemporary film Ex Machina as a coherent group concerning the boundaries of knowledge and the perils of scientific Prometheanism. The development of AI(Artificial Intelligence) must be delimited and contained, if not curtailed or banned, and scientists ought to proceed in a responsible and cautious manner. An obsessive or excessive pursuit of knowledge, usually a human's, in the direction of equaling God and creating humanoid beings constitutes the essential feature of scientific Prometheanism, which can end in catastrophic destructions. Both Frankenstein and Ex Machina are modern in spirit and make a pungent critique of an aspect of modernity, i.e. scientific Prometheanism with an exposition of the real dangers posed by AIs to the very existence of humanity and civilization. The classical discussion of Prometheanism in Milton's Paradise Lost provides the epistemological framework for Frankenstein and Ex Machina. The article concludes that the union of science and arts in science fiction/films can be very productive.
引文
Bloom,Harold.Introduction.Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.Ed.Harold Bloom.New York:Chelsea,1987.1-11.Brackett,Virginia.Critical Companion to Mary Shelley.New York:Facts on File,2012.Cude,Wilfrid.“Mary Shelley’s Modern Prometheus:A Study in the Ethics of Scientific Creativity.”The
Dalhousie Review 52(1972):212-25.Griffin,Andrew.“Fire and Ice in Frankenstein.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 49-73.Hill-Miller,Katherine C.“My Hideous Progeny”:Mary Shelley,William Godwin,and the Father-Daughter
Relationship.Newark:U of Delaware P,1995.Hunter,J.Paul,ed.Frankenstein:The 1818 Text,Contexts,Criticism.2nd ed.New York:Norton,2012.James,Louis.“Frankenstein’s Monster in Two Traditions.”Frankenstein,Creation and Monstrosity.Ed.
Stephen Bann.London:Reaktion,1994.Kerrigan,William,et al.,eds.The Complete Poetry and Essential Prose of John Milton.New York:Modern
Library,2007.-,eds.Paradise Lost.New York:Modern Library,2008.Kinsley,James,and M.K.Joseph,eds.Frankenstein.Oxford:Oxford UP,1969.LaValley,Albert J.“The Stage and Film Children of Frankenstein:A Survey.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 243-
89.Levine,George.“The Ambiguous Heritage of Frankenstein.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 3-30.
-,and U.C.Knoepflmacher,eds.The Endurance of Frankenstein:Essays on Mary Shelley’s Novel.Berkeley:U of California P,1979.
Lew,Joseph W.“The Deceptive Other:Mary Shelley’s Critique of Orientalism in Frankenstein.”Studies in Romanticism 30.2(1991):255-83.
Lewis,Linda M.The Promethean Politics of Milton,Blake,and Shelley.Columbia:U of Missouri P,1992.
Marsh,Nicholas.Mary Shelley:Frankenstein.Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2009.
Mays,Milton A.“Frankenstein,Mary Shelley’s Black Theodicy.”Southern Humanities Review 3(1969):146-53.
Mellor,Anne K.“A Feminist Critique of Science.”Mary Shelley:Her Life,Her Fiction,Her Monsters.New York:Routledge,1988.89-114.
Muller,Herbert J.The Children of Frankenstein:A Primer on Modern Technology and Human Values.Bloomington:Indiana UP,1970.
Schor,Esther,ed.Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley.Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2003.
Scott,Peter Dale.“Vital Artifice:Mary,Percy,and the Psychopolitical Integrity of Frankenstein.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 172-202.
Shelley,Mary.Frankenstein.Philadelphia:Courage,1990.
“Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind.”BBC News.Web.30 Oct.2015.
Teskey,Gordon.The Poetry of John Milton.Cambridge:Harvard UP,2015.
-,ed.John Milton:Paradise Lost.New York:Norton,2005.
Werblowsky,R.J.Zwi.Lucifer and Prometheus:A Study of Milton’s Satan.Introduction by C.G.Jung.Abingdon:Routledge,1952.
Woodberry,George Edward,ed.The Complete Poetical Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley.Vol.3.Boston:Houghton Mifflin,1892.
a1910年以来,《弗兰肯斯坦》多次被改编为电影(Schor 63-83, 283; LaValley 243-89)。
a具体到作者个人生活层面,维克托也是雪莱出版首部少年诗集时采用的笔名,该诗集除了雪莱的作品外,还收录了他妹妹伊丽莎白的诗作。有心的读者会注意到《弗兰肯斯坦》中主人公的表妹(即后来的妻子)的名字正是伊丽莎白(Scott 175)。本文引用的《失乐园》出自克里根(William Kerrigan)等2008年合编版,弥尔顿其他作品引自克里根等2007年合编版。
b《弗兰肯斯坦》中常用到与machine(机器)同源的词语,如machinery(7)、engine(9)、mechanism(9, 48, 49,185 )、mechanics(53)、machinations(153, 176, 186)、mechanical(204)等。1818年版首次提到“机器”处后来经作者修改,不再出现于1831年版。
c已有学者对《凯莱布·威廉斯》与《弗兰肯斯坦》的相似之处进行了详细分析(Hill-Miller 68-75)。
a整体来看,《弗兰肯斯坦》依托非宗教背景,但从基督教或弥尔顿的角度对其进行解读仍然可行,主要原因在于两个主人公(弗兰肯斯坦和他的造物)均采取了基督教视角。弗兰肯斯坦好几次不由自主地喊出“伟大的上帝”(57,191,195),表明他虽然经常表现出无神论思想,但仍有基督教意识。还有一次,弗兰肯斯坦将自己比作撒旦,“想要拥有全能的天使长”(211)。
a科学家戴维(Humphry Davy)是玛丽·雪莱的同时代人,对她产生了影响,他曾论及化学家发现火药之事(Mellor 90,94-95)。
Dalhousie Review 52(1972):212-25.Griffin,Andrew.“Fire and Ice in Frankenstein.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 49-73.Hill-Miller,Katherine C.“My Hideous Progeny”:Mary Shelley,William Godwin,and the Father-Daughter
Relationship.Newark:U of Delaware P,1995.Hunter,J.Paul,ed.Frankenstein:The 1818 Text,Contexts,Criticism.2nd ed.New York:Norton,2012.James,Louis.“Frankenstein’s Monster in Two Traditions.”Frankenstein,Creation and Monstrosity.Ed.
Stephen Bann.London:Reaktion,1994.Kerrigan,William,et al.,eds.The Complete Poetry and Essential Prose of John Milton.New York:Modern
Library,2007.-,eds.Paradise Lost.New York:Modern Library,2008.Kinsley,James,and M.K.Joseph,eds.Frankenstein.Oxford:Oxford UP,1969.LaValley,Albert J.“The Stage and Film Children of Frankenstein:A Survey.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 243-
89.Levine,George.“The Ambiguous Heritage of Frankenstein.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 3-30.
-,and U.C.Knoepflmacher,eds.The Endurance of Frankenstein:Essays on Mary Shelley’s Novel.Berkeley:U of California P,1979.
Lew,Joseph W.“The Deceptive Other:Mary Shelley’s Critique of Orientalism in Frankenstein.”Studies in Romanticism 30.2(1991):255-83.
Lewis,Linda M.The Promethean Politics of Milton,Blake,and Shelley.Columbia:U of Missouri P,1992.
Marsh,Nicholas.Mary Shelley:Frankenstein.Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,2009.
Mays,Milton A.“Frankenstein,Mary Shelley’s Black Theodicy.”Southern Humanities Review 3(1969):146-53.
Mellor,Anne K.“A Feminist Critique of Science.”Mary Shelley:Her Life,Her Fiction,Her Monsters.New York:Routledge,1988.89-114.
Muller,Herbert J.The Children of Frankenstein:A Primer on Modern Technology and Human Values.Bloomington:Indiana UP,1970.
Schor,Esther,ed.Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley.Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2003.
Scott,Peter Dale.“Vital Artifice:Mary,Percy,and the Psychopolitical Integrity of Frankenstein.”Levine and Knoepflmacher 172-202.
Shelley,Mary.Frankenstein.Philadelphia:Courage,1990.
“Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind.”BBC News.Web.30 Oct.2015.
Teskey,Gordon.The Poetry of John Milton.Cambridge:Harvard UP,2015.
-,ed.John Milton:Paradise Lost.New York:Norton,2005.
Werblowsky,R.J.Zwi.Lucifer and Prometheus:A Study of Milton’s Satan.Introduction by C.G.Jung.Abingdon:Routledge,1952.
Woodberry,George Edward,ed.The Complete Poetical Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley.Vol.3.Boston:Houghton Mifflin,1892.
a1910年以来,《弗兰肯斯坦》多次被改编为电影(Schor 63-83, 283; LaValley 243-89)。
a具体到作者个人生活层面,维克托也是雪莱出版首部少年诗集时采用的笔名,该诗集除了雪莱的作品外,还收录了他妹妹伊丽莎白的诗作。有心的读者会注意到《弗兰肯斯坦》中主人公的表妹(即后来的妻子)的名字正是伊丽莎白(Scott 175)。本文引用的《失乐园》出自克里根(William Kerrigan)等2008年合编版,弥尔顿其他作品引自克里根等2007年合编版。
b《弗兰肯斯坦》中常用到与machine(机器)同源的词语,如machinery(7)、engine(9)、mechanism(9, 48, 49,185 )、mechanics(53)、machinations(153, 176, 186)、mechanical(204)等。1818年版首次提到“机器”处后来经作者修改,不再出现于1831年版。
c已有学者对《凯莱布·威廉斯》与《弗兰肯斯坦》的相似之处进行了详细分析(Hill-Miller 68-75)。
a整体来看,《弗兰肯斯坦》依托非宗教背景,但从基督教或弥尔顿的角度对其进行解读仍然可行,主要原因在于两个主人公(弗兰肯斯坦和他的造物)均采取了基督教视角。弗兰肯斯坦好几次不由自主地喊出“伟大的上帝”(57,191,195),表明他虽然经常表现出无神论思想,但仍有基督教意识。还有一次,弗兰肯斯坦将自己比作撒旦,“想要拥有全能的天使长”(211)。
a科学家戴维(Humphry Davy)是玛丽·雪莱的同时代人,对她产生了影响,他曾论及化学家发现火药之事(Mellor 90,94-95)。