In Fyodor Dostoevsky’s psychological novel, Crime and Punishment, a false sense of self-righteousness and freedom has lead to an internal conflict of conscience and prevalent guilt, as demonstrated with the novel’s main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov (Rodia⇝). The author affirms the idea that psychological workings are correlated with our surrounding environment and ideologies. Those that maintained self-restraint, a sympathetic view towards others, and did not view themselves as superior as Sonia and Dunia* have, had the ability of living life rather than going through the motions as Rodia does after the murder. The author has his own experiences with “struggle between faith and reason ...fundamental to [his] philosophy” and his …show more content…
Rodia sees Razumikhin because he is “kinder than anyone” yet insisted on being left alone, bringing into play Rodia’s mix of self-punishment for his crime with an attempt to isolate himself and prideful demeanor of self-reliance (Dostoevsky and Meyer 110). Even though Razumikhin was surrounded by the same ideology and education as Rodia he does not express the same passion over superior and inferior men as Rodia does as one can characterize through Rodia’s article and thoughts. In contrary to Razhumkin, Rodia also has to rely on his sister and mother for money. In the 1860s, Russia had just ended serfdom and there was still a large divide between the two classes. Rodia’s own desire to achieve something greater than his own standing and to be the Übermensch drove him to act irrationally though believing himself to be rational at the time. Rodia becomes ill from guilt, as his own article infers, after killing the pawn lady and Lizaveta and being conflicted between whether or not he should confess and the possibility of him being an Übermensch which would allow him the privilege to act as he wanted (in his mind), for what he had believed to be the greater good, a Robin Hood act of sorts …show more content…
Through the analysis of criminal and social-psychology, her insight provided for a scientific rationale for Rodia’s crime, but overall appeared to only reach the surface level of the discussion with much emphasis on terminology. I agree with her personal insight over the contrasting difference between Rodia and Sonia’s sense of suffering and her particular focus on the environmental effects Rodia may have encountered that played a part in his actions. His environment lead him to a depressive and vengeful state alone with his thoughts. His poor economic and social standings a probable motivator for his revolt against the higher class, as Alyona Ivanovna represented. The higher class in Uwasomba’s critique referred to as the “ exploitative class” resonated with me as the epitomizing characters of Alyona Ivanovna, Svidrigailov, and Peter Luzhin take advantage of those around them for their own selfish endeavors. Alyona Ivanovna exploited her sister, Lizaveta, Svidrigailov exploited the young women working for him and attempted to do so with Dunia, Peter attempted with Dunia as well as Sonia, overreaching to get what they want as they are used to do within their social standing in society. The surrounding atmosphere of elites having all the money, power, and privilege leaving the lower class at their mercy is portrayed but not
The article "The Frivolity of Evil" by Theodore Dalrymple analyzes the causes of human misery. His work as a psychiatrist in Great Britains slums afforded him a great vantage point to analyze this topic "nearer to the fundamental of human existence." He concluded that the citizens of Great Britian willingly participated in precipitating their own misery. Their are three recurring theme in his article the lack of moral responsibility, extreme individualism and lack of cultural expectations. Dalrymple begins his article by showing the mind frame of a prisoner released from prison, who had the idea that he had paid his debt to society. In order to get his point across Dalrymple compares the prisoners situation to his very own, the 14 years he spent as a psychiatrist in the slums of Great Britain. He had a choice to choose a different neighborhood just like the prisoner had a choice not to commit the crime. His argument in this article is that our misery stems from the choices we make about how we choose to live our lives. He was also able to cement his arguments by comparing and contrasting the political and social differences between Great Britain and those of Liberia, North Korea and Central America. Dalrymple observed that the people in other countries had their choices taken way from them the crimes and brutality committed in these countries where not their own making. However, in Great Britain the life of violence and poverty was "unforced and spontaneous." Dalrymple argues that the evils in his country are a product of a society that promotes individualism and accepts the right of its citizens to pursue pleasures for their own self interest.
Gary Watson shares the true story of the serial killer Robert Harris in his essay “Responsibility and the Limits of Evil”. This inclusive narrative shares of a man who was once a very sensible young boy who found himself on the south tier of Death Row in San Quentin Prison. Through this story, the reader learns first about Robert Harris’s crime and then about his upbringing. Both of which are stories that one could consider hard to read and even consider to be a true story. Those who knew Robert Harris claimed that he was a man that did not care about life. He did not care about himself nor anyone else. Each inmate and deputy, from the prision, who was questioned about
Despite Russia being unstable during the 1860s due to political conflicts, class conflicts, and various revolutionary ideologies shaking up traditional customs, women were still constantly trapped in their own state of oppression. Women were faced with inequality everywhere - from their community, to even their own family. Compared to men, they were subordinated legally at every social level and weren’t allowed to participate in occupations outside of their domestic work. In What is to Be Done?, Nikolai Chernyshevsky implements much of the intelligentsia’s ideas for transforming the subordination of women. The novel centers on Vera Pavlovna, a woman who escapes a suffocating lifestyle and forced marriage, becomes an entrepreneur, and finds her own true love with the help of her new found independence. Chernyshevsky uses Vera’s journey as an example of how a woman is oppressed and how she is able to be liberated from that oppression.
Suffering and its role in Crime and Punishment are centered on Raskolnikov, his “infinite love” for Sonia, and the “repay[ment for] all her sufferings” (542). Sonia, the eighteen-year-old stepdaughter of Katerina Ivanovna, does not want to be sucked into prostitution but is forced to because of the living conditions her family is faced with (17). The situation that Raskolnikov believes Sonia to be in fosters the misconception that she is just as bad as he, thus he confronts her about it. Raskolnikov does not realize that his shallow thoughts add to her suffering and he takes her for granted until she becomes ill (540). Sonia’s suffering is final pivot that turns Raskolnikov’s perception of an ubermensch. Now, it is Raskolnikov turn to pay for his new life, the life that will only come after “great striving, [and] great suffering” (542).
Political prisoners and criminals alike were subject to brutal conditions in the Soviet gulags at Kolyma in the 20th century. In Varlam Shalamov’s Kolyma Tales, the stories of many different prisoners are told and much is revealed about how humans react under these pressures, both naturally and socially. Being in an extreme environment not only takes a toll on one’s physical well-being, but on one’s mental and emotional state as well. The stories show that humans can be reduced to a fragile, animalistic state while in the Kolyma work camps because the extreme conditions force many men to focus solely on self-preservation.
Eysenck, H.J., & Gudjonsson, G.H. (1989). The causes and cures of criminality. Contemporary Psychology, 36, 575-577.
Dostoevsky's 1865 novel Crime and Punishment is the story of an expelled university student's murder of an old pawnbroker and her sister. The idealistic ex-student, Raskolnikov, is ultimately unable to live up to his own nihilistic theory of what makes a "Great Man" and, overcome by fits of morality, betrays himself to the police. Exiled to Siberia, suffering redeems the unfortunate young dreamer. Crime and Punishment is similar in many ways to Balzac's Pere Goriot, especially in respect to questions of morality. In Balzac, the master-criminal Vautrin lives by an amoral code similar to Raskolnikov's theory of Great Men--unrestrained by conscience, Vautrin holds that laws are for the weak, and those clever enough to realize this may overstep any boundaries they wish and dominate the rest of mankind. But where Balzac's characters act on this idea without repercussion, Raskolnikov makes a transgression and then begins immediately to question it. The result is a psychological inner battle between rationality and sentimental moralism which is as much a contest between Empiricism and Romanticism as it is a contest between good and evil, or God and the Devil.
Before and following Raskolnikov’s murder, he lives a life of anxiety and pride. Raskolnikov has no concern for anyone. But gradually Raskolnikov changes his attitude and actions. This alteration then leads him to confess and recognize his crime. This positive change is all thanks to Sonia. Throughout Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov meets with Sonia and at each meeting Raskolnikov advances in recovering his lost emotions. Sonia was necessary for Raskolnikov’s growth because without her Raskolnikov would have remained a prideful, miserable, man. Sonia’s actions and thoughts for Raskolnikov influence and move him. Yet Raskolnikov is the one who truly changes himself. But this transformation is only possible by Sonia. So she is a positive and
Within the tortured mind of a young Russian university student, an epic battle rages between two opposite ideologies - the conservative Christianity characteristic of the time, and a new modernist humanism gaining prevalence in academia. Fyodor Dostoevsky in the novel Crime and Punishment uses this conflict to illustrate why the coldly rational thought that is the ideal of humanism represses our essential emotions and robs us of all that is human. He uses the changes in Raskolnikov's mental state to provide a human example of modernism's effect on man, placing emphasis upon the student's quest for forgiveness and the effect of repressed emotion.
One of the central principles of Enlightenment states that people should be ruled by laws and not by rulers, as this principle is the rule of law. A mysterious contradiction, which lies in the concept of human freedom, has opened to Dostoevsky in the early period of his life. The whole meaning and joy of life for man lies in this concept of free agency and this self-will. In "Crime and Punishment," the problem of self-will gets other artistic decision. The writer reveals the essence of the self-will of Raskolnikov using the words of Rodion Romanovich's for the good of humanity, which is the equivalent of the Crystal Palace, where the idea of Napoleon clearly emerges. This concept describes an elected one, who if standing over humanity and prescribing personal laws to them. Therefore, the writer uses his novel to prove, that the law is the central issue for the stable life of humanity, and anyone has the power and right of disobedience.
No humane person with any values is able to commit a heinous crime without some feeling of guilt or remorse afterwards. Slowly, this guilt festers and eats away at one's conscience until the point of escape, reached by confession, thus leading to salvation. Throughout Dostoyevsky's Crime and. Punishment the main character, Raskolnikov is stricken with guilt and suffering that eventually lead to his confession and redemption motivated by many forces.
Guilt in Crime and Punishment In Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoyevsky tells the story of a young man who has been forced out of his studies at a university, by poverty. In these circumstances, he develops his theory of an extraordinary man (Frank 62). This conjecture is composed of the idea that all great men must climb over obstacles in their way to reach their highest potential and benefit humankind. In Raskolnikov's life, the great obstacle is his lack of money, and the way to get over this obstacle is to kill a pawnbroker that he knows.
Within the article Raskolnikov analyzes the psychology of a criminal before and after the crime. This main portion of the article is not discussed, but it is likely that the psychological explanation that Porfiry gives Raskolnikov later, in the examination, is very similar. During this later examination, Raskolnikov appears resentful, but never disputes what Porfiry tells him, perhaps because it is a regurgitation of Raskolnikov's own thoughts. In the last meeting of the two men, Porfiry admits that he liked the article very much, and actually felt a connection with it. The one part of the main body of the article that is mentioned is "that the perpetration of a crime is always accompanied by illness" (225). Porfiry comments that this idea is very original; Raskolnikov welcomes this praise.
Raskolnikov kills the pawnbroker ,Alena Ivanovna, not for the money or the valuables she had in her apartment.The reasoning behind Raskolnikov wanting to kill Alena is because she is immoral, who cheats the poor and considers her as a creature. She would brutally beat and abuse her step-sister, and pressure her do all the dirty work for her. After killing Alyona Ivanovna, Raskolnikov steals her possessions. Instead of selling the items , Raskolnikov hides the objects under a rock. Raskolnikov reasons this murder was for the greater good for the people, because Alyona’s money could go to help the people of the town. Raskolnikov knew no one would have the strength or means to get rid of “this creature” referring to Alyona Ivanovna. Raskolnikov thoug...
If Kafka thought he had confronted and dealt with his faults, then there was no reason the engagement should not have worked out happily when resumed. But, like K., though he thought he was aware of and owned up to his own faults, he was still convicted for his denial and the engagement was again broken off. The Trial is Kafka’s exploration of the extreme consequences of denying one’s own guilt and thus one’s own humanity. In some senses, it serves as a warning, or a sort of parable of its own, and in others it is simply an expression of anguish. The story serves to warn against thinking so highly of oneself that we only interpret infractions of the outright law as guilt.