Why do you think so? To me the story is obviously about the hypocrisy of the Church, not about how they set an impossible standard. And most mankind is condemned because they deserve to be condemned, like most thieves are condemned because they deserve it. To me, the whole idea of changing moral standards so that more people meet them is nonsensical. Moral standards should be what they are, if you don't meet it, then so be it, admit it and move on. What's the difficulty of saying X is wrong but I still want to do it? At least then there is some dignity there.Ivan's famous Grand Inquisitor speech is about how Christ sets an impossible standard and thereby condemns nearly all of mankind — csalisbury
And shouldn't she feel guilty for what she has done? It is the guilt which redeems her, and which makes her do anything to pay for her sins. Without the guilt, no redemption would have been possible.Alyosha makes Gruschenka feel guilty — csalisbury
I think she's more like the person who has good intentions but ends up creating more chaos around her, because, as Trump would say, she simply can't get the job done.Katerina Ivanovna, in a weird twist, wants to be the one who redeems, and gets frustrated by those who won't allow themselves to be redeemed by her. — csalisbury
The weak, always hate the great for some reason. I don't understand why they have to resort to such petty jealousies. I always admire greatness wherever I see it.Father Zossima makes the other monks resentful — csalisbury
Why do you say this?Fyodor Pavlovich is that he seems to have a genuine, deep understanding of the problematic — csalisbury
Really? >:O Then why does it happen to him? If he's so bright, he should have foreseen it. I'm speaking in a bit of coded language because it seems John hasn't yet finished the book?he can see through people, to their true motives — csalisbury
For me, it's 5 parts Zossima, 6 parts Mitya, and 1 part Alyosha.I'd say, of the Karamazov family, I'm 1 part Alyosha, 3 parts Ivan, 2 parts Dimitri, 3 parts Fyodor, and 3 parts Smerdyakov — csalisbury
I agree that Fyodor is much like a psychopath, in that he has no degree of self-control or restraint. Forget that he feels no empathy for others - but he's just the kind of idiot who cuts the very branch on which he's sitting. He's not even a proper evil man - he's just self-destructive. He doesn't understand how his well-being depends on managing those around him. He doesn't understand how upsetting other people will end up destroying him. He doesn't understand how his ruthlessness is actually destroying him. He doesn't understand anything.Fyodor Pavlovitch can certainly be seen as an archetypal despicable intruder and ruiner. A man who has so little regard for anything but his own whims and desires; who can turn on the charm when necessary but is really a kind of psychopath with no genuine empathy for the feeling of others. — John
Why do you think so? To me the story is obviously about the hypocrisy of the Church, not about how they set an impossible standard. And most mankind is condemned because they deserve to be condemned, like most thieves are condemned because they deserve it. To me, the whole idea of changing moral standards so that more people meet them is nonsensical. Moral standards should be what they are, if you don't meet it, then so be it, admit it and move on. What's the difficulty of saying X is wrong but I still want to do it? At least then there is some dignity there. — Agustino
And shouldn't she feel guilty for what she has done? It is the guilt which redeems her, and which makes her do anything to pay for her sins. Without the guilt, no redemption would have been possible. — Agustino
He doesn't understand how his well-being depends on managing those around him.
Could anyone please explain to me why Dimitry has to look for 3,000 roubles when he apparently has them tied to his neck the whole time? Also, why does he have to look for the full amount when he apparently split it in two and only spent 1,500? — Daniel Miller
I disagree with your interpretation of Dimitri. I view Dimitri as the "most successful" of the 3 brothers, the one who ultimately rights his wrongs and emerges on top, despite the fact that he ends up sentenced for a crime he did not commit. His and Gruschenka's love when they finally meet again is, arguably, one of the best moments of the book.(a) an attempt to deny one side of your complex motivations leads to ruin (as illustrated by Dimitri's fate); — John Doe
The problem with Alyosha is that he never put his hand in the fire so to speak. He was always a spectator, whatsoever was happening, was not happening to him. I think Alyosha is just the lofty side, without the animal side. Dimitri, on the other hand, ends up as the merger of the lofty and the animal side - or in other words, in Dimitri, the animal side is divinised, lifted up.(c) Joy is found in embracing both sides in a well-ordered set of instincts rather than pitting them against each other (as illustrated by Alyosha's fate and Zosima's shortcomings). — John Doe
I view Dimitri as the "most successful" of the 3 brothers — Agustino
I disagree with your interpretation of Dimitri. I view Dimitri as the "most successful" of the 3 brothers, the one who ultimately rights his wrongs and emerges on top, despite the fact that he ends up sentenced for a crime he did not commit. — Agustino
The problem with Alyosha is that he never put his hand in the fire so to speak. He was always a spectator, whatsoever was happening, was not happening to him. — Agustino
This reconciliation of [Mitya's] personality and its flaws only comes after his arrest, through the act of expiation, when he embraces his fate with the help of Alyosha. His initial motivations (to do away with the 'base', 'sensual', 'Karamazov' side, as he puts it in his first talk with Alyosha early in the novel) are untenable and lead him to ruin in the form of nearly killing either his father and/or Grigory Vasilievich. Only an existential 'miracle', in the form of brute luck and contingency, saves him, and opens him up to salvation through expiation and forgiveness. Alyosha plays a key role in this. — John Doe
And the other lunatic Smerdyakov has a bit more brain than Fyodor. He is proper evil. And there's nothing to talk about with proper evil (especially one feigning weakness) except destroy it. — Agustino
Well, that's one of the sources of the beauty of the novel, it's purposefully set-up so that each of us will identify with different characters in different ways depending upon our own personality, inclinations, motivations, desires, etc. — John Doe
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.