In this paper, I plan to explain Dostoevsky’s criticism of Western Individualism. Dostoevsky’s first criticism resides in the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it, “which is presented by the character Alyosha (Dostoevsky 3). Allowing this character to discuss this topic, along with the commentary of Ivan, demonstrates their mindset to solely focus on their own lives, opposed to caring for others. This leads to them living for the now, and not focusing on how their decisions will affect their future or others. Dostoevsky disapproves of this notion because living by this mentality encourages the guidance of logic, which is dangerous because it could tell you to kill yourself. From Dostoevsky’s Eastern Orthodox background, he believes that the only way from living from this situation is to deny it. By denying this way of living, the focus toward life will not be directed toward yourself, but toward the way you can impact the environment around you. Ivan clearly does not believe in these values, due to his intentions to commit suicide at the age of thirty. As said before, living by the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it” leads to death, and Ivan indulges in this to the fullest (Dostoevsky 3). In addition, Ivan’s basic assumptions, regarding freedom and happiness, brings up ideals of western individualism. On page 24 of The Grand Inquisitor, Dostoevsky says, “But let me tell Thee that now, today, people are more persuaded than ever that they have perfect
In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky creates a psychological thriller, in which he reimagines his own life through the eyes of Raskolnikov. Whereas the Russian government sentences Dostoevsky to Siberia as punishment for sedition, Siberia serves a means of atonement for Raskolnikov. This type of religious undertone reinforces the novel’s existentialistic messages that emphasizes individual existence, freedom and choice. It holds the view that humans define their own meaning in life, and try to make rational decisions despite existing in an irrational universe. Thus, humans create their own purpose in life and their choices define who they are. Dostoevsky utilizes figurative language, specifically biblical allusions, as a way of conveying and clarifying these themes to the reader. By connecting to Bible, the author universalizes the intention, allowing the reader to apply the text to their own lives, and granting the audience further insight into the novel. Thus, biblical allusions help enrich the themes of Crime and Punishment while also cementing the central message of salvation- anyone, even murderers, have the potential to redeem themselves.
The central theme of Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky deals with conformity’s role in society. Dostoyevsky uses conformity to make Raskolnikov mentally ill and eventually turn himself in to face the punishment for his crimes. Religion influences every character in the book, but none more ardently than Raskolnikov. Understanding religion’s role as a force for conformity in Crime and Punishment provides a powerful insight into character motives and, furthermore, philosophical influences.
Furthermore, in Leo Tolstoy‘s The Death of Ivan Ilyich, and analysis will demonstrate that the character Ivan Ilyich struggles throughout his life to achieve the ideals of liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness. It is through Ivan’s death and his friend’s narration of Ivan’s life that the reader comes to the realization the the middle-class Ivan has few strength’s besides his hard work to drive him towards his ideals for wealth and property. Ivan lived his whole life with the purpose of enjoying himself. He did this through winning power at work, spending money, buying things to impress his friends, throwing parties, and playing bridge. His pursuit of happiness in material things and pleasures is so great that his deliberately avoids anything unpleasant. This means that when he settled down with a family, which was expected of him, he never grows close to them.
“For what is freedom? That one has the will to assume responsibility for oneself.” (Nietzsche. Twilight of the Idols. Trans. Hollingdale. Sect. 38). Everyone desires freedom but everyone cannot handle the responsibilities of freedom. I will compare J.S. Mill’s views on the social function of freedom with that of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s characters from both, the novel Notes From Underground and the excerpt; The Grand Inquisitor, also drawing supplementary arguments from Friedrich Nietzsche, while expressing my views alongside.
Dostoevsky’s believes in existentialism, and the idea that individual freedom is essential to the development of the mind (Copleston 165). He speaks through his characters by presenting them as “continually defeated as a result of their choices” ( “Existentialism”). Though Raskolnikov is allowed to make his own decisions he ended up making the wrong ones. He is forced to face his consequences of the murders he committed. Dostoevsky’s blend of philosophy with the novel allows
The problem of evil is honestly one of the greatest obstacles to believe of the existence of God. Their are times I sit and think of all the suffering in the world, and wonder if whether it is caused by mans inhumanity to one another or natural disasters. Though I can honestly say I find it hard to believe in a God at times. Then again, I think there comes a time when some people feel the same way.
This ethics study will define the problem of utilitarianism in the “ethics of care proposed by Virginia Held (2006) within the literary context of Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky. Held (2006) defines the problem of utilitarian ethics as an abstraction of emotions in moral issues, which alienates the individual in the care process. This method denies the premise of "care” when Raskolnikov decides to murder an old man in order to rationalize the death of woman to save the lives of thousands in terms of health care. Held would view Raskolnikov’s descent into criminal behavior as part of this immoral aspect of Mill 's theory of values. More so, Held (2006) would discern the “greater good” theory of Mill’s ethical approach to without an emotional or relational value systems between human beings. In essence, an argument against Mill’s utilitarian Theory of Values will define Raskolnikov’s descent into criminality in the context of Held’s ethics of care philosophy of interpersonal relationships in the community.
From declaring he wanted to become a Napoleon to wishing for financial independence to murdering for his own sake, he rattles off various motives, showing his obsessive rationalization (394-397). By presenting his conflicting intentions, Dostoevsky exhibits the chaos within Raskolnikov’s mind.
Imperial Russian society during the time of serfdom was characterized by constantly changing social order. The society experienced a complex social change at the threshold to emancipation. It was undergoing many changes with increasing westernization and serfdom culture that gave rise to formation of new classes (raznochintsy) during the nineteenth century. Many authors have reflected and emphasized this component of change in the structure of pre-emancipation Russian society. This paper will examine how two writers: Nikolai Gogol and Ivan Turgenev, in their novels, Dead Souls and Fathers and Sons depict the society’s constantly changing nature through the relationships between their characters and the development in their beliefs and ideas. Although both the novels explore societal change during the pre-emancipation of serfs, the emphasis of change is different in both the novels. In Fathers and Sons, Turgenev oversees shifting values prevalent in the society. He explores the shift in generational values by depicting the difference in beliefs of characters like Bazarov and Nikolai. On the other hand, in Dead Souls Gogol focuses on issues of morality in society. He depicts a struggle for morality and portrays a corrupt society through the landowners and the protagonist, Chichikov, in his book.
That Rodya is convinced by this line of reasoning to the point of action suggests that he also is devoid of the deontological ethics that are associated with the traditional, Orthodox Russia. Rodya’s willingness to commit this heinous crime which ultimately destroys not only Alyona, but also Rodya himself and the innocent Lizaveta suggests that Dostoevsky's novel is a critique of the nihilistic utilitarianism of Rodya.
One of the themes of Tolstoy’s story of The Death of Ivan Ilych is detachment from life, considering that all material things can substitute the true meaning of life: compassion and care for others. “Everywhere in the novel, Tolstoy speaks of Iván Ilych's desire for propriety, decorous living, and pleasantness all while making this his first and most important priority. This motivation is a poor
“Nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom.” –The Grand Inquisitor” “Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.” - Father Zosima. These two quotes voice the polarized philosophies that impregnate the book, The Brothers Karamazov. Ivan, the second of the three sons, and Zosima, the old monk, are huge commentators on the question, “Is the burden of free will to much for a human to bear?”
Leo Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich tells the story of a modern lawman whose sudden mortality forces him to evaluate the worth of his life and the life choices he has. Throughout the novella, Tolstoy reveals social norms and practices blindly followed by those in the upper-middle class. These norms bring to light modernity’s core values, which Tolstoy critiques through the actions Ivan Ilyich takes before his death, Ivan Ilyich’s revelation as he lies on his death bed, and the way Ivan Ilyich’s family, friends, and colleagues react to his illness and eventual death. In fact, The Death of Ivan Ilyich provides a critique on modernity as a whole; Tolstoy condemns the shallow, superficial lives the higher-ups in society lead, spurred on by the idea of modernity.
Through Raskolnikov’s exemplification of the impracticality of this principle\, Dostoevsky makes his greatest point in Crime and Punishment. His commentary on the subject seeks to discredit the theory in the circumstance of an individual “superman” by displaying Raskolnikov as a character who is difficult for readers to identify with because of his inanity. Even Raskolnikov’s name is a symbol of nihilistic ideas, the word “raskol” meaning schism in Russian, illustrating the shift from an older school of thought (social utopianism) to a darker philosophy: nihilism and utilitarianism. Raskolnikov seems to fluctuate back and forth between the two philosophies, acting on one and then mentally chastising himself for it, immediately and almost erratically changing his mind. This symbolizes the more human side of him struggling
The author showed his opinion on the structure of the society, social norms and beliefs. He expressed his disagreement with “The Extraordinary Man Theory”. He told the audience that all people have feelings and emotions and cannot rely only on logic and calculations. People cannot hurt others and go unpunished. The ending of the novel helped to strengthen his ideas and convictions. In the end, everyone in the novel received the deserved punishment assigned either by the law or by fate. Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov realized that their actions were wrong and contradicted to the all social norms. They recognized that they were not extraordinary men. Dostoevsky made this novel very educative and filled with morality. It is great for people of all times and generations. It reveals what is good and wrong; it teaches how to be a