In the chapter titled Rebellion (or his book title), Feodor Dostoevski’s character, Ivan Karamazov, demonstrates that his angry and resentful attitude is the by-product of his very choosing. The fundamental principal of our own humanity is God’s acknowledgment of our expression of free will. Found between the boundaries of man’s ownership of worldly acts and thoughts, which can lead him to an eternity of joy or damnation, is that critical choice of what attitude we will wrap ourselves in for our finite time here. The extreme, and perhaps somewhat all too common, result of this human choice between simple joy and compounding suffering is presented in Ivan. As highlighted in Genesis account of Gods’ pure joy and pleasure of man, and His authoritative command for man’s dominion over all of His creations, it is impossible to imagine our Creator desiring our willing choice for suffering.
God’s divine plan for man starts and ends upon love. God provides overflowing and unconditional love so we can grasp the extent of His love for the purpose of developing our own love of self. The evolvement of our personal faith instills in us the divine sense of worth and desire, we some how come to “know” originates from our Creator. Ivan has neither grasped nor developed this love, let alone experienced this instilment. Genesis states God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (KJV Gen 5:26). In the shared likeness of God Himself, we must assume we all have the full capacity to experience and share God’s innate love and joy. God’s sending of His son in order to redeem us, His children, is the ultimate act of both heavenly and earthly love. Through His written word and through His son, God explicitly teaches us that love and joy are the nature of His being. Man, in God’s likeness, must actively counter this nature in order to derive an attitude of suffering, through the denial of natural joy and love. Ivan is a clear example of this suffering activism, as he clearly stands against most issues rather than necessarily in agreement or support of any higher principal. In Feodor Dostoevski’s book The Brothers Karamazov, this excerpted chapter is appropriately titled “Rebellion”. Rebellion is defined as the willful resistance or defiance of an established principal or authority. In our definition of activism, Ivan’s rebellion would be considered the most aggressive and destructive form of activism.
Ivan’s philosophy revolves around the idea that free will, the choice to choose the good or the bad, is too much to bear. The bulk of his philosophy is formed for the reader in his epic tale entitled “The Grand Inquisitor.” It talks about free will, and how unfair it was for Christ to give it to humanity. He argues that humanity on the whole cannot sustain itself because they again and again choose the bad. The Grand Inquisitor oppose...
The book 1984 by George Orwell is about a dystopian society called Oceania. Big Brother is the unseen leader of this society. Telescreens monitor every move of the Outer Party. The party consists of the Inner Party and the Outer Party. The Inner Party is the highest class in society, followed by the Outer Party. The lowest class is the Proles. The Proles are not monitored because the Inner Party considers them ignorant and does not consider them as a potential threat. People are monitored in order to eliminate thoughtcrime (any unorthodox thought). The new language of Oceania is Newspeak. The Party is trying to simplify language to limit thought. The Party also rewrites historical events in order to keep the past in line with Big Brother’s agenda. The main character, Winston, works on rewriting history. Winston and Julia (his lover) are against the government and join an underground revolution. Eventually, they are caught and are brought to the Ministry of Love (an organization that punishes crime by torture and brainwashing). They are separated and tortured. Winston is tortured by a man named O’Brien. Winston is tortured physically when he is beaten and starved. Winston is tortured mentally when he is brainwashed into believing what Big Brother believes. After being faced with his greatest fear, Winston submits to O’Brien and gives up his revolutionary ideals. In the end of the book, Winston confesses his love of Big Brother. Two of the main themes in 1984 are the destruction of language and the power of language. In 1984, Orwell uses Newspeak and the death of language to show that one’s thoughts are directly controlled by the language they use and he who controls the language controls the future.
“There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.”(1) This quote encompasses the intention that George Orwell had in mind when contriving 1984; he intended to caution society about the menace of a totalitarian dystopian world, in which there is no freedom, citizens are being indoctrinated, and how the ever existing lure to power will perpetually manipulate politics. In part one of this essay I will first discuss the themes of 1984 then I will consider Orwell’s objectives in writing the novel.
The novel shows how the government attempts to control the minds and bodies of it citizens, such as Winston Smith who does not subscribe to their beliefs, through a variety of methods. The first obvious example arises with the large posters with the caption of "Big Brother is Watching You" (page 5). These are the first pieces of evidence that the government is watching over its people. Shortly afterwards we learn of the "Thought Police", who "snoop in on conversations, always watching your every move, controlling the minds and thoughts of the people." (page 6). To the corrupted government, physical control is not good enough, however. The only way to completely eliminate physical opposition is to first eliminate any mental opposition. The government is trying to control our minds, as it says "thought crime does not entail death; thought crime is death." (page 27). Later in the novel the government tries even more drastic methods of control. Big Brother’s predictions in the Times are changed. The government is lying about production figures (pages 35-37). Even later in the novel, Syme’s name was left out on the Chess Committee list. He then essentially vanishes as though he had never truly existed (page 122). Though the methods and activities of the government seem rather extreme in Orwell’s novel, they may not be entirely too false. "Nineteen Eighty-Four is to the disorders of the twentieth century what Leviathan was to those of the seventeenth." (Crick, 1980). In the novel, Winston Smith talks about the people not being human. He says that "the only thing that can keep you human is to not allow the government to get inside you." (page 137). The corruption is not the only issue which Orwell presents, both directly and indirectly. He warns that absolute power in the hands of any government can lead to the deprival of basic freedoms and liberties for the people.
“…And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.” (Matthew 6:9-13) As it says in the Bible, we wish to be led astray from evil. However, evil is a very curious subject. For most intensive purposes, evil can be described as cruel, heinous, and unnecessary punishment. Evil is a relatively accepted concept in the world today, although it is not completely understood. Evil is supposedly all around us, and at all times. It is more often than not associated with a figure we deem Satan. Satan is said to be a fallen angel, at one point God’s favorite. Supposedly Satan tries to spite God by influencing our choices, and therefore our lives. However, this presents a problem: The Problem of Evil. This argues against the existence of God. Can God and evil coexist?
Dictionary.com defines a tragic hero as a great or virtuous character in a dramatic tragedy who is destined for downfall (“Tragic Hero”). Aristotle defined a tragic hero as a literary character who makes a judgment error that inevitably leads to his own destruction (“English IV Class Discussion”, 2016). A tragic hero must be physically or spiritually wounded by his experiences, often resulting in his death; intelligent so he may learn from his mistakes; have a weakness, usually it is pride; and be faced with a very serious decision that he must make (“Tragic hero as defined by Aristotle”). Achilles, Hector, Beowulf, and Hamlet all exhibit these characteristics and, as a result, can be seen as prime examples of tragic heroes.
A tragic hero is defined as a person of high social rank, who has a tragic flaw or flaws that lead to their downfall. These heroes’ downfalls are usually either complete ruin or death. Tragic heroes face their downfall with courage and dignity. While many characters in Julius Caesar could fit these conditions, the person who fits the role of a tragic hero the best is Marcus Brutus. Brutus develops into a tragic hero throughout the play, and this is shown though his qualifications of a tragic hero, his high status, his tragic flaws, and his courage in the face of his death.
...n of accepting God, or, at the very least, His necessity. Of course, it could be argued that this 'acceptance' only stands in the context of the novel-that is, the events in the novel are structured so as to make all non-believers come to bad ends and thus make it seem as though any path other than that of Zosima and Alyosha is the wrong path; however, I must stress that the existence of such a profound conscience in Ivan and our deep sympathy for him leads us, almost inevitably, to reject the idea that'all things are lawful' because our sympathy proves that we ourselves have consciences as well. Thus, whether we believe in God or not, we are forced to admit that we must at least act as though there is. To do otherwise is to risk the fate of Ivan Fyodorovich Karamazov.
Many features of Orwell's imaginary super-state Oceania are ironic translations from Stalin’s Russia. In Oceania, the Party mainly uses technology as the chief ingredient to implement a psychological manipulation over society by controlling the information they receive. An example of this is the big screen television set up in every person’s home, and the poster all over the city. The giant “telescreen” in every citizen’s room blasts a constant stream of propaganda designed to make the failures and short successes of the Party appear to be glorious. In Winston Smith’s apartment, this “instrument” is always on spouting propaganda and constantly brain washing the peoples’ mind. In actual fact, “It could [only be] dimmed… there [is] no way of shutting it off”. In doing this, the Political Party is in complete control over the citizens’ mind, blasting what they want each individual to think (Orwell, 6). They psychologically stimulate each individuals mind, limiting their ability to think and have a mind of their own. In a similar way, Stalin’s created “The Poster” and The Pravda (the Russian newspaper controlled by the government during Joseph Stalin's regime) to twist and manipulate the minds of people into believing that what they were saying was absolutely right and truth. Using this power, Stalin and his regime would get people to do anything for them. (Basgen, 2010)
Ivan’s non-acceptance of faith stems from the innocent suffering of children. There is in him an intense conflict between his desire for “rational” retributive justice, on the one hand, and the sublimity of universal forgiveness, on the other. The intensity of Ivan’s conflict between his desire for “rational” retributive justice, on the one hand, and the sublimity of universal forgiveness, on the other, is revealed by Dostoevsky’s underlining. Nonetheless, Ivan is unyielding in his refusal, which culminates in his famous declaration: “And so I hasten to give back my entrance ticket, and if I am an honest man I must give it back as soon as possible. . . . It’s not God that I don’t accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return Him my ticket.”
Ivan doesn't necessarily accept God, but rather the world that was created. He cannot accept the fact that there can be such immense suffering in this world. The amount of injustice that goes on in this world is unacceptable to Ivan. The lack of intervention by God is what infuriates him. The question that Ivan considers, is what's the ideal world; world of justice or a homogeneous one? In an immaculate world of justice, a person such as the general in the story would pay for his atrocious crime. If we all must suffer to pay for eternal harmony, what have children to do with it? He questions the position we have in the future
In the novel 1984, George Orwell predicts the world’s future, when human rights, such as freedom of speech, do not exist anymore. Everyone has to obey the government. The government controls its citizens’ lives. No one speaks up against the government yet because they do not even have a chance to make up a thought about it. The government dominates the citizens’ thoughts by using technologies and the thought polices to make sure no one will have any thoughts, that is against the government. George Orwell wrote:“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows,” (Orwell.2.7.69) the government tries to control Winston knowledge and change it to fit into the purpose of the Party. To Winston, O’Brien said: “Whatever the Party holds to be truth is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party.” (Orwell.3.2.205). As a citizen, no one get to look at or tal...
Good vs. Evil. The theme every book, movie or story deals with at least once. We even deal with it in our real world. The issue becomes even greater when the evil matches the good, like Sherlock and Moriarty or Guy and Bruno. The combination of the protagonist and the antagonist creates a crisis which can only be solved if both parties cease to exist or one part gives in their role. We see this in both “Sherlock” BBC series and in the movie “Strangers on a Train” where both sets of doubles demonstrate the need of the other member for existence.
The conflict between good and evil is universal to the human condition. It is a theme common to both history and literature. In 1866 Joseph Roux wrote, “Evil often triumphs, but never conquers”. In “Mercy Among the Children” by David Richards, the Henderson family suffers many injustices, and is exposed to “evil” in many forms. Roux’s statement can be analyzed through the examination of the characters, including the Henderson’s themselves and those who most deeply affect them.
The free will defense of the presence of moral evil is that it is logically possible that God could have created a world with creatures that always did the right (good) thing, never harmed anyone or anything and did no wrong. But, these creatures are not free to do as they will, existing like robots. It is far better to have a world of creatures that are significantly free, that generally perform more good acts than evil acts. Although this is superior to not having free will, God cannot make creatures only do good, nor can God stop creatures from doing evil. So, when humans use free will to perform evil, it is an act done free of God’s will and goodness. This is the source of moral evil, the overt decision (use of free will) to commit sin