I feel that it is necessary to limit the actions of scientists in some aspects of study, but without pushing some of the boundaries then we as a society could possibly be missing out on cures or technologies that would be beneficial. My main belief is that science should not harm people. Study, research and experimentation should be done to help people not harm them. So if a scientist were performing experimentation on someone in a way that could harm them I think it is wrong to do. Many people would say that scientists should not do anything immoral, but I think that to say that scientists should not do things that are immoral is not a very clear statement. Reason being that everyone has different morals. So what is right to one person is actually wrong to another.

Within the beginning of Hawthorne’s “The Birthmark”, Hawthorne seems to say that scientists should be able to do what they want to help benefit mankind. He shows a very successful scientist that is willing to put his wife in a dangerous position for the good of science. As the story progresses I think Hawthorne wants the reader to see the adverse affects that science can have. He shows the kind of uncontrollable nature of science and experimentation. I think Hawthorne was trying to warn the readers of the danger or science. He was saying that some things in nature shouldn’t be tampered with, even if they are beneficial in some way. Even though Aylmer was able to successfully remove the birthmark, God, or maybe nature, taught him a lesson by taking away Georgiana’s life. Aylmer was taught that there can only be one all powerful being in the world.