★★★★★

disclaimer: this was my epq so it’s like the most formal i will ever be lol but i think it was a very good essay and i want to share it. plus i got an A star, so i’m quite proud of it. also, idk how to insert my reference table… so, do excuse the very random numbers. if i manage to find out how, i will include them.

word count: around 5k

To what extent does 1800s Gothic literature portray human nature as inherently dual?

Abstract: 

1800s Gothic literature presents human nature as mostly divided because of the repressive nature of societal structures. Views from Saint Augustine, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, and Thomas Aquinas reflect the conflicting views about whether humans are born innately good, innately evil, or simply divided between good and evil. The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, The Picture of Dorian Gray and Frankenstein all reflect the internal conflict experienced by humans as a result of social expectations around morality, reputation and conformity which causes the division of their natures. Overall, nineteenth century Gothic literature appears to present humans as inherently divided in different ways, but the blame is ultimately put on institutions like religion and law which encourage the repression of certain behaviours in society.  

Introduction: 

1800s Gothic literature portrays human nature as inherently dual by exploring the tension between moral goodness and immoral desire. The theme of duality became prominent in the late eighteenth century and intensified as scientific developments, specifically Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory, challenged the traditional religious understandings of humanity. The 1800s in England were marked by rapid industrialisation and this resulted in massive urban growth with people moving from the countrysides to London, inevitably causing social inequality. During the Victorian period, which lasted from 1807 until 1901, reputation was highly regarded in the upper and middle classes. Important figures were expected to maintain a moral and respectable image, while their private lives contradicted these façades.This contrast between outward behaviour and secret indulgences reflected double lives led by many members of society¹. During this time, England was deeply influenced by Christianity², teaching humans that they were created in God’s image as divine creatures with a moral purpose. The first Biblical book of Genesis serves as the foundation of this belief, explaining that humans began with Adam and Eve³. However, the publication of Charles Darwin’s ‘On the Origin of The Species’ in 1859 challenged this belief by presenting humans as evolutionary, shaped by instinct and survival rather than divine design⁴. The contrast of these beliefs brought about substantial tension between science and religion during the nineteenth century. In literature, this conflict is explored through the divided nature of humans. Gothic texts tended to depict humans as struggling to manage opposing sides of their nature, suggesting that humans contain both respectable moral traits and also primitive immoral desires. ‘The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde’ by Robert Louis Stevenson explores this division through a scientist who physically separates his immoral and moral sides into two distinct identities⁵. Similarly, ‘The Picture of Dorian Gray’ by Oscar Wilde presents a young man whose appearance remains youthful and attractive while his portrait reflects his moral corruption, creating a doppelgänger effect⁶. Additionally, Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’ also engages with this theme of duality where a scientist, Victor Frankenstein, unnaturally manufactures a creature, blurring the lines between monsters and humans⁷. Ultimately, it is evidentthat 1800s literature portrays human nature as inherently divided. However, in doing so, religion and law become the blame for this division because without social standards, these characters would not have felt conflicted between being immoral and moral. It is arguable that humans have two fixed natures, one being good and one being bad. But the terms ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are subjective to societies, time periods, political stance, and belief systems, thus making it difficult to definitively say if something is totally evil or good. Therefore, humans are subconsciously presented as one but are divided by the strict social codes of which they are conditioned to.  

The duality of human nature: 

Human nature has been analysed and debated by philosophers for centuries. Whether or not humans are inherently dual has not been proven nor disproven, yet many philosophers and theologians from Plato to Jean-Jacques Rosseau have given their unique perspectives about what they believe is truth about human nature. The Bible, being what influenced the 1800s beliefs about human nature, explains that humans have the capacity to do both good and evil, yet are naturally inclined to do evil, shown when Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate the fruit in the Book of Genesis⁸. It also explained that the cause of this natural inclination to do evil comes about due to natural desires overruling reason and understanding. This rather pessimistic view of human nature is reaffirmed by St Augustine who believed that human nature is inherently corrupted as a result of ‘The Fall’ explored in Genesis, meaning our wills are naturally inclined to be sinful⁹. Augustine blames human corruption on the abuse of free will, as it was intended to be a gift from God, yet Adam and Eve exploited it¹⁰. However, Plato explained that humans have a ‘divided soul’ as humans want to do good but are affected by temptation. Although not a stark contrast to the Biblical perspective, Plato conveys that humans are mostly positively natured, but they cannot defeat their natural instincts, and it is the reasonable side of the human that lives to resist temptation which makes them ‘just’¹¹. However, what makes Plato’s view distinct is because he argued that the human soul has three parts: reason, spirit and appetite. So, although Plato’s view doesn’texactly align with the belief that humans have a dual nature, it denies the simplicity of labelling humans as solely good or bad. On the other hand, Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that humans are inherently good and are instead corrupted by the society of which they are conditioned to¹². According to the Chrisitan doctrine, humans are corrupted by temptation, leading them to do evil. This supports Rousseau’s view that humans are products of their environment because Adam and Eve would not have defied God if the snake had not encouraged them to. Therefore, humans may have been created as good, yet external influence is what changes this. On the other hand, John Locke theorised that humans are born a ‘tabula rasa’, which is Latin for ‘blank slate’¹³. This further supports the idea that humans are products of their environment and that without societal influence, their good nature would not be corrupted. Alternatively, Thomas Hobbes, in his book Leviathan, argued that humans are born selfish and require law and order to keep them controlled¹⁴. Hobbes believed that humans are driven by fear, particularly the fear of death, which evokes competitive behaviour which must be managed by authoritarian regimes¹⁵. From a theologian viewpoint, St Thomas Aquinas theorised that humans are born with the rational ability to understand moral truths constructed by God to fulfil their purposes. Aquinas’ Natural Law posits that humans participate in God’s eternal law, which is conveyed through scripture, such as the Bible, creating divine law and therefore sets a natural law that outlines the general moral standard. Aquinas also explores the purposes of humans through his declaration of the primary precepts: preservation of life, reproduction, educating offspring, living in society and worshipping God¹⁶. Natural Law and the primary precepts work together in the sense that humans must behave according to the Natural Law to fulfil these purposes. Though the views of Augustine and Aquinas contrast with those of Plato, Rosseau and Locke, they all encapsulate the nuance of human nature. With support of Augustine and Aquinas, it is arguable that there are two sides of human nature, one being evil and one being good. They both highlight the inherent sinfulness of humans and therefore the importance of law in society, alongside Thomas Hobbes’ perspective which also emphasises the necessity for control over humans due to this inherent sinfulness. However, the more optimistic view of human nature from Rosseau and the more neutral ones from Plato and Locke contrast the Biblical take that humans are fundamentally corrupted by original sin. Overall, views of human nature vary. There is no definitive answer to whether humans are innately dual or not. Yet some of the perspectives align with the nineteenth century belief that humans are innately dual and others contrast it.  

Duality in The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde: 

In The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, the author Robert Louis Stevenson presents human duality as a result of repressive Victorian expectations rather than an innate human condition. While the novella is often seen as presenting humans with two natures: good and evil, a deeper interpretation highlights the criticism of Stevenson towards the social standards that force humans to repress their natural instincts and display a front of conformity and respectability. Dr Jekyll himself embodies this tension as he is not inherently an evil man, but a gentleman expected to maintain an image of moralitywhich requires excessive repression of his deeper desires. This repression becomes too much, leading Jekyll to try and remove his evil self from his true self using a scientific experiment. As a result, Jekyll manages to have created Mr Hyde, the embodiment of Jekyll’s immoral side. This physical split embodies the severity of the expectations in Victorian society as they lead Jekyll to directly remove his primitive side from himself. This interpretation can be supported by the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau who believed that humans are fundamentally good creatures who are corrupted by their environments. Hyde can therefore be understood as the distorted manifestation of societal corruption as opposed to total evil. Rousseau’s concept of amour propre, vanity aroused by social comparison¹⁷, is relevant in analysing how Jekyll’s status as a Victorian gentleman depends on maintaining an illusion of being morally perfect. This creates an internal conflict as his natural human desires cannot be expressed, which makes them eventually uncontrollable. Perhaps Stevenson is critiquing a society that defines morality and places stringent expectations around this definition, suggesting that such rigid structures do not eliminate immoral impulses and instead intensify them, making them ultimately more problematic. Jekyll probably would not have created Hyde if he were able to express his innate desires more freely because his repression would not have gotten so intense. This idea is further enforced by religious moral philosophy, particularly the Christian notion of original sin, echoed in the works of Saint Augustine. Augustine argued that because humans are born with original sin, they are naturally inclined towards moral corruption and can only achieve salvation through God’s grace¹⁸.  From this perspective, one might see Hyde as evidence of humanity’s fallen nature, representing the inevitable emergence of sin when it is no longer restrained by moral discipline. However, Stevenson shifts the blame away from religion and instead onto human-made institutions. Rather than blaming Hyde’s sinfulness on original sin, it is implied that the problematically strict expectations forced on people in Victorian society restrict the healthy embrace of both the primitive and socially acceptable desires of humans. In this sense, Stevenson somewhat challenges Augustine’s view by indicating that what appears to be original sin may be brought about by unhealthy repression. Similarly, Thomas Aquinas’s idea that human beings are rational beings can be applied to Jekyll’s situation as he attempts to scientifically separate aspects of his personality. Aquinas argues that reason and morality can coexist harmoniously¹⁹, whereas Stevenson demonstrates that when moral expectations become excessively stringent, reason itself becomes repressive, ultimately becoming destructive. This critique becomes even stronger when considering the role of Victorian law in shaping identity. The legal system in the novella is an underlying structure that defines what is socially acceptable and what must be hidden. The character of Mr Utterson, a lawyer and close friend of Jekyll, embodies this legalistic worldview as he prioritises reputation, evidence and rationality. However, glimpses of corruption are evident around this legal field when Utterson conceals Jekyll’s odd behaviour. Utterson is somewhat aware of the unusual business between Jekyll and Hyde, yet he prioritises his friendship with Jekyll in this case instead of acting on his legal obligations. This slight crack in the strong legal foundation of Victorian England humanises the legal field and reminds readers that these social expectations are upheld by humans and that change is possible. Yet Utterson’s concealment of Jekyll’s problems creates this atmosphere of secrecy as it is likely that Utterson kept this situation hidden to protect Jekyll’s reputation and perhaps his own as he is associated with Jekyll. The emphasis placed on reputation throughout the novella highlights the priority of external perception over internal integrity. However, Stevenson suggests that such compartmentalisation is unsustainable, as the repressed self gains autonomy and eventually overwhelms the controlled identity. This is proven when Jekyll can no longer defeat his inner desires, leading to the eventual uncontrollable release of Hyde. This externalisation of psychological conflict wasincreasingly common in the Gothic genre. The recurring mention of darkness, fog and confinement establishes an ominous setting, further resembling the secretive nature of society. London itself becomes a divided place, with the respectable streets contrasting the unpleasant alleyways. Jekyll’s house, believed to be in Leicester Square, meanwhile Hyde resides in Soho, notorious for its scandalous nightlife and opium dens²⁰. Soho is mostly associated with filth and sexual immorality. It is referred to as the ’waste product’ of London in the novella, which indicates that Hyde is the waste product of Jekyll²¹. This distinction between pleasant and filthy areas of London reflects the distinction of good and evil in humans and therefore shows that the dual nature of humans derives from the environment they live in. Nature is associated with the surroundings it develops in and thus alludes to the idea that duality is not an inherent feature of human nature but constructed by their habitats. Ultimately, Stevenson presents human nature as unified originally, but fragmented by external influences such as social organisations, strict expectations that demand outward conformity and religious moral determination. Jekyll’s downfall becomes a cautionary tale about the consequences of persistent repression, as near the end of the novella, Jekyll affirms that ‘Man is not truly one, but truly two.’, displaying the strength of his belief that humans are inherently dual. Yet Stevenson ultimately critiques the strict expectations that have forced this duplicity of humans to come about in the first place. 

Duality in The Picture of Dorian Gray: 

Oscar Wilde also presents duality as the result of strict societal expectations in The Picture of Dorian Gray. The novel sees an attractive young man, Dorian Gray, whose portrait, painted by his friend Basil Hallward, outwardly displays Dorian’s moral corruption while Dorian himself remains physically perfect. This doppelgänger effect created by Wilde suggests that human dualism is forced by external influences rather than being an innate aspect of humanity. Dorian begins as an innocent individual, susceptible to influence and it is his exposure to Basil’s friend, Lord Henry Wotton’s, advocacy for hedonism that alters Dorian’s moral compass. Hedonism refers to the belief that pleasure is the highest good and must be frequently indulged in²². Influence being the blame for Dorian’s moral decay combats Augustine’s argument that humans are born with original sin or that they are born inherently divided. Instead, this interpretation aligns closely with John Locke’s theory of the tabula rasa, which posits that the mind is a blank slate at birth and is shaped by experience²³. This is supported by Dorian’s beginning state of moral malleability as he is described as almost an angel, being completely untouched by corruption. However, upon meeting Lord Henry, he is exposed to a world of excessive pleasure indulgence and prioritising the individual experience above all else. Lord Henry asserts that “the only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it”, which becomes a guiding principle for Dorian. Thus, Dorian’s eventual moral decay is not inherent evil, but instead solely the imprint left by Lord Henry’s destructive philosophy of hedonism. However, this interpretation directly opposes the views of Thomas Hobbes who argues that humans are naturally self-interested and therefore inclined towards moral corruption. Using Hobbes’ perspective, Dorian’s decent into sin could be argued as submission to an already existing inner depravity. But Wilde challenges this view of innate sinfulness as Dorian evidently starts off morally pure, only indulging in vice upon the encouragement of Lord Henry. It appears that Wilde may be supporting hedonism through Lord Henry’s adamant advocacy of such behaviour, but it is revealed to be deeply paradoxical. While the Lord promotes a life free from moral restraint, he appears to be a rather shallow character²⁴. He upholds this facade of happiness whilst he remains lonely²⁵and he attempts to drown out this lonesomeness with hedonistic behaviours such as smoking cocaine-laced cigarettes and drinking alcohol. This problematic lifestyle led by Lord Henry aligns hedonism with negativity and perhaps suggests that indulging in one’s deeper desires is problematic and therefore repression of these behaviours is necessary. However, a more convincing view is that Wilde is attacking the repressive nature of society because it causes people to have unhealthy relationships with their nuanced nature. Humans struggle to control their deeper impulses because they are taught to totally ignore them which is evidently impossible. Dorian also amplifies the problems with excessive indulgence because every unethical act he commits contributes to the deterioration of his portrait. The slowly rotting portrait reflects the poisonous result of repression because Dorian’s attempt to hide his doings causes internal turmoil. This creates tension between the two ideas of hedonism and repression because Wilde shows them to be just as problematic as each other. The more a desire is repressed, the more intensely it is felt and therefore the more extremely it will be pursued²⁶. But hedonism is shown as the reason for the division between social appearance and personal reality. Perhaps Wilde is arguing that some repression is necessary to prevent total moral decline. Sigmund Freud considers the double as a product of repression, yet this repressed desire is always seeking to emerge until finally submitted to²⁷. The apparent necessity of repression can be further understood through the work of Thomas Aquinas whose ’Natural Law’ theory explains the supposed requirements humans are expected to fulfil during their lifetimes in relation to the Christian scripture. These requirements, known as the primary precepts, include: the preservation of life, reproduction, education, worship of God and ordered society²⁸. Therefore, this suggests that non-reproductive sexual desires are unethical. During the 1800s, this ideology fuelled the condemnation of homosexuality, which was characterised as evil temptation and associated with the deviant side of human nature. However, Wilde attempts to destabilise this belief. The intense admiration that the painter, Basil Hallward, has for Dorian, and the underlying homoerotic themes within the texts suggest that such desires are not aberrations but natural human inclinations. As a result, Wilde indicates that the classification of homosexual relationships as “evil” must be socially and religiously constructed²⁹.  Therefore, it is alluded to that the repression of these desires, enforced by social norms, is what brings about the internal division as opposed to innate separation. Dorians need to conceal parts of his identity reflects the societal demand to repress desires that do not conform to accepted moral conventions. Yet, this repression does not resolve this tension. Instead, it intensifies it. Dorian’s outward conformity to social expectations allows him to maintain his perfect reputation. But, internally, the depth of his moral decay and the toll it is taking on him is evident in his slowly withering portrait. The portrait becomes a symbol of repression, holding the truth that society refuses to acknowledge. It is arguable that Wilde prioritises superficial morality over genuine integrity, mirroring the preferences in Victorian society. Dorian becomes conflicted between these extremes, and this tension directly causes his demise. His attempts to eliminate the consequences of his actions, by destroying his portrait, results in his own death. The connection between the portrait and Dorian is an unusual one because they are physically separated but spiritually connected. Although Dorian only attempted to rid of his morally corrupt side, his physical self ended up dying as well because the two entities were inextricably linked. Ultimately, the novel supports the idea that humans are one, not dual, through Dorian’s two sides not being able to coexist alone. Instead, this duality is exposed to be a result of the societal pressures that force individuals to fragment their identities. Wilde’s portrayal of homoerotic desire further reinforces this argument, revealing how categories of “good” and “evil” are constructed in ways that supress natural aspects of human nature. Therefore, Wilde shows how humans are not inherently dual. Instead, they are one but nuanced. Their natures become divided under the strict expectations of society that cause shame and guilt, leading to secrecy, hence the leading of double lives.  

Duality in Frankenstein: 

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein explores duality primarily through the troubled coexistence of favourable and undesirable qualities³⁰, exposing how society uses aesthetics as a marker of morality. This is expressed through the tension between science and religion and the blurred lines between the creator and the creation. A young scientist, Victor Frankenstein, attempts to create a being from scratch, defying the widely accepted belief that creation is divine by arguably playing God³¹. This conflict between the creator and creation reflects the nineteenth century oppositional attitudes towards scientific development. Despite admiration for scientific advancement, there were lingering fears about the depths that transcendental science would reach before it touched divine levels. Transcendentalism echoesthe beliefs of Rousseau as it posits that humans are inherently good yet are corrupted by social institutions³². Transcendental science sought to go beyond human limits in life and death. The concept threatened religious belief as it aimed to imitate or replace divine power. Dr Jekyll from The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde engaged in such practices also when he manually split himself into two. Victor Frankenstein is seen to practice this form of science when he manages to create this so-called “monster”. The monster is described as an uncanny, hideous being. The appearance horrified Frankenstein since he had expected it to be attractive, outlining the scientist’s fixation on beauty from the beginning. He comes to hate the creature because of its looks and assumes that it is evil and must be destroyed. This instantaneous rejection of the being both foreshadows and reflects the social repellence of unappealing people, hence the high regard for reputation and respectable presentation in the nineteenth century. The creature’s grotesque form initiates the basis on which society judges and excludes it regardless of its initial innocence. Shelley appears to be criticising the ethics of aestheticpreference by suggesting that society’s tendency to equate beauty with morality and ugliness with evil. This idea resonates with themes explored in The Picture of Dorian Gray as Dorian remainsunsuspected of evil within society because he is outwardly perfect despite his concealed moral decay. This misleading expectation highlights the dangers of assuming that what appears desirable must be innately good. In Frankenstein, Shelley subverts this logic by presenting a being whose external monstrosity hides its initial benevolent nature. Victor Frankenstein, driven by an interest in galvanism³³, desires to transcend boundaries of human knowledge and conquer death. Influenced by the Enlightenment, Victor becomes consumed by the ambition to create life artificially³⁴. His success, however, proves to be a mistake when he is instantly revulsed by what he has made and he abandons the creature, establishing and foreshadowing a cycle of rejection and suffering that persists throughout the novel. The creature reinforces the ’tabula rasa’ theory of John Locke, having been born with no prior memory or relation to other people, meaning that its nature is wholly constructed by social experience. Its early experiences are based on curiosity and its development of basic skills like communication and engaging in relationships. These actions suggest an inherent goodness and innocence, strengthening Rousseau’s concept of the “noble savage” which argues that humans are born with a loving nature, but society brings out the evil in them³⁵. Yet the creature is feared by society due to its unappealing appearance and is attacked as a result which gradually reshapes its understanding of itself and society. According to Locke’s empiricism, all human knowledge and identity come from external experience³⁶; in the creature’s case, these experiences are negative which lead to internalised hate and feelings of alienation. Shelley thus uses the creature to highlight the malleability of human nature, reinforcing the idea that moral character is not predetermined but constructed through influence. Furthermore, the creature’s desire for companionship shows a natural inclination towards harmony rather than violence. However, society’s refusal to accept this abnormal creature transforms this benevolence into bitterness. Each act of rejection contributes to its isolation, eventually leading it to embrace the role of the “monster” that society has imposed on it. Shelley thereby critiques not only individual prejudice but also the structural forces that define and enforce social exclusion. The creature’s declaration that it was once “benevolent and good” but became “malignant” as a result of misery encapsulates this transformation, illustrating how external rejection can distort personal perception. Rousseau’s influence is evidentin Shelley’s portrayal of society as the corrupting force, suggesting that evil arises not from nature but from the failure of social inclusion. Victor himself also partakes in the novel’s exploration of duality as his motivations for discovering a way to combat inevitable death are both egotistical and curiosity driven. This divided motive is demonstrated when Victor abandons the creature without even naming it³⁷. Since the creature does not live up to Victor’s aesthetic standards, it is left to fend for itself because this creature is no longer needed once Victor successfully discovers that he can create life from scratch and defy the inevitability of death. As a result of this abandonment, Victor denies this creature moral development and companionship, effectively creating the very monster he fears. In this sense, the creature and Victor are fundamentally opposite because Victor remains outwardly respectable but is internally irresponsible and cruel towards the creature who appears monstrous externally but has a pure nature. This presentation seeks to criticise aesthetic based moral judgement because what is displayed on the exterior is seen to not always match the interior. As the creature grows, it becomes more aware of its nature and behaviours of society. This intellectual progression enriches the creatures understanding of alienation which encourages it to resort to violence. Eventually, it ends up murdering Victor’s loved ones out of anger about how it has been treated. Therefore, it is displayed that the creature was not inherently evil or dual. Instead, it was originally plain. A ’blank slate’, and the cruel attitudes of society evoked its later violent behaviours. Ultimately, Mary Shelley presents duality in Frankenstein as an inescapable aspect of human lives, but not inherent because it is the inevitable influence from society that causes this dual nature. Instead, human nature is portrayed as a single entity which contains the nuances of behaviours picked up from experiences.  

Conclusion:  

Overall, 1800s literature mostly presents human nature as inherently dual. But, in doing so, social institutions like religion and law bring about societal expectations that create this division in humanity. This is because they force people to repress the sides of themself that are considered evil and wrong. The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson blames the repressive nature of society for the splitting of human nature as Victorian society had strict codes regarding reputation that people were expected to follow in order to fit in. This was the same case in The Picture of Dorian Gray as Dorian’s portrait displays his moral decay, representing his guilt and dedication to keeping it concealed from society. This encouraged the leading of double lives and the eventual physical splitting of one’s nature into “good” and “bad”. What is considered “good” and “bad” varies depending on context. For example, homosexuality was considered sinful in the 1800s, but it is widely accepted today, in 2026. Therefore, morality is subjective. There is no such thing as “good” or “bad” because what is considered “good” and “bad” in society is constantly changing, which means that the division of human nature is based on societal structures rather than original status. In Frankenstein, on the other hand, human nature is portrayed as one very nuanced entity, supported by John Locke’s theory of the ‘tabula rasa’, explaining that humans are blank slates and their identities are established through experience. Humans being ‘one’ does not mean that they only have one aspect to their nature. Rather that they have natural tendencies to do good and bad which are largely shaped by experiences and they are overall complex beings. Neither “good” or “bad”. Instead, they are sophisticated creatures living in a society that has categorised certain behaviours as positive and negative. This shows that human nature is not split but constructed by society. As a result, it appears that human nature is unitary rather than dual, with society determining what humans can and cannot do according to its definition of morality.  

---

Bibliography:

‘7 Ingenious Victorian Inventions’ (English Heritage) <https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/inspire-me/victorian-inventions/>&nbsp;priority_highWebpage authorclosepriority_highDate publishedclose

Abrams K, ‘Might Accurate Heartbeat Perception Increase the Risk for Alcoholism?’ [2018] Science Trends priority_highVolume numberclosepriority_highIssue numberclose

Aiken D, ‘Religion | British Literature Wiki’ (British Literature Wiki) <https://sites.udel.edu/britlitwiki/religion/>&nbsp;priority_highDate publishedclose

Aquinas T, ‘Summa Theologica’ (http://www.ccel.org1947) <https://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/home.html&gt;

Bertram C, ‘Jean Jacques Rousseau’ (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy27 September 2010) <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/&gt;

Bina Venkataraman, ‘The Problem with “Playing God”’ (Slate Magazine11 January 2017) <https://slate.com/technology/2017/01/frankenstein-and-the-problem-with-playing-god.html&gt;

Blakemore E, ‘How Twitching Frog Legs Helped Inspire “Frankenstein”’ <https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-twitching-frog-legs-helped-inspire-frankenstein-180957457/&gt;

Buscicchi L, ‘Paradox of Hedonism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy’ (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy) <https://iep.utm.edu/paradox-of-hedonism/>&nbsp;priority_highDate publishedclose

Campbell P, ‘Lord Henry: The Devil on Dorian’s Shoulder’ (Traitor Books16 April 2025) <https://www.traitorbooks.com/post/lord-henry-the-devil-on-dorian-s-shoulder&gt;

Cru A, ‘Dualism in the Victorian Age’ (British Literature 1700-1900, A Course Blog23 November 2013) <https://britlitsurvey2.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/dualism-in-the-victorian-age/&gt;

Evgeny, ‘Is Homosexuality Norm? What Does Science Say’ (Medium17 September 2020) <https://medium.com/@evgeny_o/is-homosexuality-norm-what-does-science-say-5039b87b9e3f&gt; accessed 24 March 2026

Garrett DrJ, ‘Augustine on Human Nature’ (people.wku.edu5 March 2002) <https://people.wku.edu/jan.garrett/august.htm&gt;

hansonenglish mr, ‘Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde – a Strange Case of Abjection’ (Mr Hanson’s English 18 March 2017) <https://mrhansonsenglish.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/dr-jekyll-and-mr-hyde-a-strange-case-of-abjection/&gt;editmore_vert

Hobbes T, ‘Leviathan’ (Project Gutenberg1651) <https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3207/3207-h/3207-h.htm&gt;

International Bible Society, The Bible : Today’s New International Version. (Hodder & Stoughton 2007)

Keller T, ‘Redeemer Report’ (http://www.redeemer.com2015) <https://www.redeemer.com/redeemer-report/article/the_bible_and_same_sex_relationships_a_review_article&gt;

Keo, ‘Is Basil in Love with Dorian? – Late 19th Century British Literature & Culture’ (Late 19th Century British Literature & Culture29 October 2018) <https://blogs.dickinson.edu/britishlit/2018/10/29/is-basil-in-love-with-dorian/&gt;

Lin CY, ‘The Roaring Twenties: Consumerism, Decadence and All That Jazz’ (The Collector20 March 2022) <https://www.thecollector.com/the-roaring-twenties-jazz-age/&gt;

Maden J, ‘John Locke’s Empiricism: Why We Are All Tabula Rasas (Blank Slates) | Philosophy Break’ (Philosophy BreakMarch 2021) <https://philosophybreak.com/articles/john-lockes-empiricism-why-we-are-all-tabula-rasas-blank-slates/&gt;

McCabe C, ‘Rousseau on Human Nature: “Amour de Soi” and “Amour Propre”’ (1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology27 September 2021) <https://1000wordphilosophy.com/2021/09/27/rousseau-on-human-nature/&gt;

McCartney M, ‘Mapping Home in the Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’ (ArcGIS StoryMaps23 April 2020) <https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/7d3f6b8707e94e31aa65663a33d327ee&gt;

Mohr R, ‘A Moral Evil’ (Boston Review10 June 2025) <https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/a-moral-evil/&gt; accessed 23 April 2026

Nayanika Saikia, ‘My Selection — Lord Henry Wotton – Literary Selections – Medium’ (Medium27 July 2021) <https://medium.com/my-selection/my-selection-lord-henry-wotton-8ec34b1b3113&gt;

Nyx Shadowhawk, ‘Art and Hedonism in the Picture of Dorian Gray – Nyx Shadowhawk – Medium’ (Medium14 June 2023) <https://medium.com/@nyxshadowhawk/art-and-hedonism-in-the-picture-of-dorian-gray-359492af8679&gt;

Özkan F, ‘Human Nature in Plato’s Philosophy’ (2020) <https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/1499487&gt;

Philosophical Chat, ‘Thomas Aquinas: The Philosophical Giant of the Middle Ages’ (Philosophical.chat19 December 2023) <https://philosophical.chat/philosophy/philosophers-and-their-philosophies/aquinas-philosopher-medieval-thought/&gt; accessed 12 April 2026

Poorghorban Y and Taghizadeh A, ‘The Monstrosity of Knowledge: Mary Shelley’s Symbolic Encounter with the Enlightenment and Industrialisation in Frankenstein’ (2024) 22 Anglo Saxonicaeditmore_vert

Rapp TS, ‘The Myth of the Noble Savage’ [2024] http://www.noemamag.com <https://www.noemamag.com/paradise-lost/>&nbsp;priority_highVolume numberclosepriority_highIssue numberclose

Readhead H, ‘What Hobbes Thought of Human Nature – Harry Readhead – Medium’ (Medium23 October 2024) <https://guiltandindustry.medium.com/what-hobbes-thought-of-human-nature-9f3c301c249f&gt;

Rogers G, ‘John Locke’, Encyclopedia Britannica (Britannica 2018) <https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Locke&gt;

Scollurio, ‘What Is Hedonism and Why Is It Killing Us? | Readers Hope’ (Medium26 February 2024) <https://medium.com/readers-digests/what-is-hedonism-and-why-is-it-killing-us-8dea6a93b0d3&gt;

Shelley M, Frankenstein (Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor & Jones 1818)

Stevenson RL, The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (Pan Macmillan 1886)

tfx, ‘How Is Duality Used to Create Meaning within the Novel “Frankenstein”?’ (2019) <https://www.tsfx.edu.au/resources/vce-2019-english-list-1-frankenstein-essay-8-FINAL.pdf?srsltid=AfmBOopU__48uAD2Qy-ZrkZMuHw_bdtEM3Icuhd6tSgA8XNKauG1zo-3&gt; accessed 23 April 2026editmore_vert

Tornau C, ‘Saint Augustine’ (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy25 September 2019) <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/augustine/&gt;

Vardy C, ‘The Five Primary Precepts Are the Most Important Part of Natural Law.  Discuss [40]’ (Logos6 January 2025) <https://divinityphilosophy.net/2025/01/06/the-five-primary-precepts-are-the-most-important-part-of-natural-law-discuss-40/&gt;

Wikipedia Contributors, ‘Transcendentalism’ (Wikipedia14 March 2019) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentalism&gt;

Wilde O, The Picture of Dorian Gray (Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine 1890)

Wohlford A, ‘Eagle Scholar Eagle Scholar Student Research Submissions Spring 4-28-2023 Dorian and the Double: Repressed Homosexual Desire in the Dorian and the Double: Repressed Homosexual Desire in the Picture of Dorian Gray Picture of Dorian Gray’ (2023) <https://scholar.umw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1582&context=student_research&gt;