Is AI Our 21st-Century Frankenstein?

As a scientist who devoted my career to new business development, I applaud the ingenuity behind artificial intelligence. I welcome its potential to support medical care, scientific discovery, education and everyday convenience. Technology should serve humanity, helping us live better throughout life.

Yet I cannot ignore the breathtaking speed of AI development and its expanding presence in our homes, schools, workplaces and communities. Are we creating tools faster than we are learning to manage them responsibly?

That question brings to mind Mary Shelley’s classic novel, “Frankenstein.” Often remembered as a horror story about a monster, it is also a study of ambition, creation and moral neglect. Victor Frankenstein dreams of overcoming disease and death. His aspirations reflect a desire to advance science for humanity’s benefit.

But his achievement exposes his lack of foresight. Fascinated by discovery, he fails to prepare for the responsibilities that follow. Horrified by his creature’s appearance, he abandons it. The resulting tragedy invites us to consider not simply the dangers of creation but the consequences of refusing to nurture, guide and remain accountable for what we create.

AI is not Frankenstein’s creature. The comparison is a cautionary metaphor, not a prediction. It reminds us that technical achievement and ethical responsibility must move together.

As a grandfather, I see this challenge close to home. Watching my grandchildren gain access to AI, I marvel at the possibilities. A question can receive an immediate answer. A difficult subject can be explained in different ways. Ideas for stories and creative projects can appear within seconds.

But I also wonder: Could this convenience weaken the next generation’s ability to think critically?

I do not believe that outcome is inevitable. Much depends on how children learn to use these tools. There is a difference between asking AI to explain a problem and asking it to complete an assignment without understanding the answer.

Critical thinking means questioning assumptions, checking information, considering other viewpoints and reaching a reasoned conclusion. Sometimes it requires patience and the experience of being wrong. We should not let the convenience of instant answers make those habits seem unnecessary.

For families in Bluffton, the goal should be balance, not fear. Parents and grandparents can ask children to explain their reasoning, compare an AI response with other sources and describe what they learned. Teachers can encourage exploration while preserving opportunities for independent thought.

The same balance belongs in business and health care. Efficiency should not eclipse privacy, human judgment, compassion or accountability. Those who develop and deploy AI should remain responsible for evaluating its effects and addressing its failures.
We need neither reject AI nor accept it unquestioningly. We can welcome innovation while insisting that it serve human values.

Shelley’s novel offers a lesson in responsibility. Our task is to build a future in which technological power is matched by wisdom. AI should expand our abilities, not diminish our curiosity, judgment or concern for one another. That is the balance we owe our grandchildren and humanity.

Dr. Nabil El-Hag, PhD, MPH in Nutrition Biochemistry.