In the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky, we observe how the great and most cruel theory of Rodion Raskolnikov is born, how the main character tests himself, testing it. The collapse of such a theory is inevitable, but it occurs in two senses: in the real world and in the mind of Raskolnikov himself. The origin of Raskolnikov's theory and its collapse form the basis of the plot of the novel Crime and Punishment.
The origin of the theory
The difficult financial situation, hopeless poverty and the inability to change one's present and future push the young student Raskolnikov to create his own theory. At the time when he left the university (due to lack of money for education), he gives his article to print, but the newspaper is closed. After some time, he learns that his brainchild was published in another newspaper. At that time, the theory still seemed to him a game; it did not enslave Raskolnikov's consciousness. He developed it, found a number of evidence, looked closely at people and was convinced of the correctness of his conclusions. However, after he left school, hunger, stress, impotence and despair forced him to withdraw into himself. The theory became his main idea, its implementation, testing for “strength” passed into the plan stage.
The essence of the theory is as follows: by nature, all people are born either “decency”, “ordinary” or “great”, “special”. Of course, very few of the latter are born, nature itself decides when and where a special person should be born. Such people “move history”, create something new, accomplish something of world importance. The rest live quietly, give birth to their own kind, they are the “material” for those who are higher and more important than them. However, Raskolnikov does not believe that this makes them worse: such people are obedient, kind, but they are “crowd”, “mass” (“... they are obliged to be obedient, because this is their purpose, and there is absolutely nothing humiliating for them ”).
Hearing a conversation in a pub, a young man is convinced that other people support his opinion. A random student voices in a conversation what was born in Raskolnikov's soul and was waiting in the wings.
Raskolnikov's conversation with the investigator
Raskolnikov's theory is revealed in sufficient detail in a conversation with Porfiry Petrovich, the investigator in the case of the murder of an old woman and her sister. He, as it turned out, was familiar with Raskolnikov's article, he was interested in an unusual look at the young man's society. Explaining the postulates of his theory, Rodion quite carefully reveals to his interlocutor his motives for the crime, but the investigator, of course, does not realize this. He is sincerely glad that he can communicate with the author of the article and express his opinion on this topic.
People who are called upon to bring something new into the life of mankind, according to Raskolnikov, have a certain superiority and completely different rights (moral, of course).
For example, to kill someone if necessary: “... if he needs, for his idea, to step over at least a corpse, through blood, then he, in his conscience, can, in my opinion, give himself permission to step over blood , - depending, however, on the idea and size of it, - notice this ...”).
Testing the theory and its collapse
The theory absorbed Raskolnikov so much, as if "someone took his hand and pulled him along ... It was as if he had hit a piece of clothing in the wheel of a car, and he began to be drawn into it." He is sincerely convinced that “Whoever dares a lot is right with them. Whoever can spit on more is the legislator, and whoever can dare more than anyone else is to the right of all! This is how it has always been and always will be!” Driven by such beliefs, the hero commits a crime by testing whether he belongs to those who are “stronger”.
What happens after Raskolnikov is shocked - he does not repent that he took the life of a person, he is horrified that he turned out to be weak, humane, obedient "material". The main flaw of a system that seemed ideal was the one who gave birth to it. The hero is tormented by fear, a mess of thoughts, no goals and ideas please the character - the soul suffers and suffers, and the mind is torn from the realization that he is the same as everyone else.
The material of the article will be useful in preparing for the essay "Raskolnikov's theory and its collapse."
useful links
See what else we have:
Artwork test
Dostoevsky in his novel depicts the collision of theories with the logic of life. According to the writer, this very logic of life always refutes, invalidates any theory, both the most advanced and the most criminal. That is, life cannot go according to theory. And therefore, the main philosophical thought of the novel is revealed not in a system of logical proofs and refutations, but as a collision of a person (that is, Raskolnikov), obsessed with a theory, with life processes that refute this theory.
Raskolnikov's theory about the possibility of standing over people (“Who am I: Napoleon or a trembling creature?”), Despising all their laws, is based on the inequality of people, on the chosenness of some and the humiliation of others (it should be noted that the theme of “humiliated and insulted” passed through all the works of F. M. Dostoevsky and even one of the novels is called “The Humiliated and Insulted”). The murder of the old pawnbroker was conceived by Raskolnikov as a vital test of his theory on a particular example. The crime he committed is a base and vile deed.
Razumikhin, Dunya, Porfiry Petrovich, and most of all Sonya Marmeladova - they all push Raskolnikov to think about the incorrectness, inhumanity of his theory. But the most significant role in debunking the "Napoleonic" theory of Raskolnikov was played, of course, by Sonya Marmeladova.
Raskolnikov was the first person who treated Sonya with sincere sympathy, accepted her as a “decent” young lady, and seated her next to his relatives. Therefore, the passionate devotion that Sonya answered him is not surprising. She did not understand what could be interesting for such a person as Raskolnikov. Of course, it did not occur to her that Raskolnikov saw in her almost the same criminal as himself: both of them, in his opinion, were murderers; only if he killed the old pawnbroker, then she committed, perhaps, an even more terrible crime - she killed herself and thereby doomed herself to loneliness among people.
It is in conversations with Sonya that Raskolnikov begins to doubt his theory. He wants to get an answer to the statement whether it is possible to live without paying attention to the suffering, torment and death of others.
Raskolnikov committed the crime deliberately, which is the most terrible, despising his human nature. Having killed the old pawnbroker, Raskolnikov transferred himself to the category of people, to which neither the "quarter lieutenants", nor Razumikhin, nor his sister, nor his mother, nor Sonya belong. He cut himself off from people "as if with scissors." His human nature does not accept this alienation from people. Raskolnikov begins to understand that even such a proud person as he cannot live without communicating with people. Therefore, his spiritual struggle becomes more intense and more complicated, it goes in many directions, and each of them leads to a dead end. Raskolnikov still believes in the infallibility of his idea and despises himself for his weakness, and now and then calls himself a scoundrel. But at the same time, he suffers from the impossibility of communicating with his mother and sister, thinking about them is as painful for him as thinking about the murder of Lizaveta. And he tries not to think, because if he starts thinking about them, then he will certainly have to decide where, according to his theory, to classify them - to what category of people. According to the logic of his theory, they should be referred to the “lowest category”, to “trembling creatures”, and, consequently, the ax of another “extraordinary” person can fall on their heads, as well as on the heads of Sonya and Katerina Ivanovna. Raskolnikov, according to his theory, must retreat from those for whom he suffers, must despise, hate those whom he loves. “Mother, sister, how I love them! Why do I hate them now? Yes, I hate them, I hate them physically, I can’t stand them next to me ... ”This monologue really reveals the whole horror of his position: his human nature here most sharply clashed with his inhuman theory. Immediately after this monologue, Dostoevsky gives Raskolnikov's dream: he again kills the old woman, and she laughs at him. This scene reveals the whole horror of Raskolnikov's deeds. Finally, Raskolnikov breaks down and opens up to Sonya Marmeladova. There is a clash of their ideas, each of them stubbornly stands on his own: Raskolnikov claims that a real person has the right to ignore the moral foundations of society; Sonya no less stubbornly claims that there is no such right. His theory horrifies her, although from the very beginning she was seized with an ardent sympathy for him. Raskolnikov, while suffering himself and forcing Sonya to suffer, still hopes that she will offer him some other way, and not turn himself in. “Sonya was an inexorable sentence, a decision without change. Here - either her road, or his. Raskolnikov comes to confession.
Investigator Porfiry Petrovich deliberately tries to hurt Raskolnikov's conscience more painfully, to make him suffer, listening to frank and harsh judgments about the immorality of the crime, no matter what goals it may be justified. Porfiry Petrovich saw that before him was not an ordinary killer, but one of those who denies the foundations of modern society and considers himself entitled, at least alone, to declare war on this society. Porfiry Petrovich treats Raskolnikov’s personality, his theory and crime quite definitely, - despite the need to cheat all the time, he once spoke bluntly: “... he killed, but he considers himself an honest person, despises people, walks like a pale angel ... "However, under the most sharp judgments about Raskolnikov, Porfiry Petrovich is well aware that before him is by no means a criminal who coveted someone else's property. The worst thing for society lies precisely in the fact that the criminal is guided by a theory, driven by a conscious protest, and not by base instincts: “It’s still good that you just killed the old woman, but if you come up with another theory, it’s probably even a hundred million times more ugly.” the job would be done!"
Raskolnikov was exiled to Siberia. The verdict, however, turned out to be more merciful than could be expected, judging by the crime committed, and, perhaps, precisely because he not only did not want to justify himself, but even, as it were, expressed a desire to accuse himself even more.
The task of F. M. Dostoevsky was to show what power an idea can have over a person and how terrible the idea itself can be. The hero's idea that the chosen ones have the right to commit crime turns out to be absurd and false. Life defeated theory, although Raskolnikov was ashamed precisely because he, Raskolnikov, died so senselessly and stupidly, according to some kind of verdict of blind fate, and must reconcile himself, submit to the “nonsense” of an absurd verdict, if he wants to reassure himself in any way.
Why did Raskolnikov's theory fail? and got the best answer
Answer from Christie[guru]
According to Raskolnikov's theory, all people are divided into two categories. Some, “ordinary” people, are obliged to live in humility, obedience and obedience, they do not have the right to transgress legal laws, because they are ordinary. These are “trembling creatures”, “material”, “not people”, as Raskolnikov calls them.
Others - "extraordinary" - have the right to transgress the law, commit all sorts of atrocities, outrages, crimes precisely because they are extraordinary. Raskolnikov speaks of them as "actually people", "Napoleons", "engines of the history of mankind". Raskolnikov believes that the lowest category exists in order to produce "his own kind." And "superhumans" are people who have a "gift or talent" who can say a new word in their environment. “The first category is the master of the present, and the second is the master of the future,” says Raskolnikov.
Raskolnikov proves that "extraordinary people" can and should "transgress the laws", but only for the sake of an idea "saving for mankind".
Of course, when creating his theory, Raskolnikov ranked himself in absentia among the "people". But he needs to test it in practice. This is where the old pawnbroker “turns up”. On it, he wants to test his calculation, his theory: “One death and a hundred lives in return - why, there is arithmetic here! And what does the life of this consumptive, stupid and evil old woman mean on the general scales? Nothing more than the life of a louse, a cockroach, and even that is not worth it, because the old woman is harmful.
So, not possessing the necessary material condition. Raskolnikov decides to kill the usurer and thus obtain the means to achieve his goal. But according to the theory of the hero of the novel, he has the right to “step over” if the fulfillment of his ideas (saving, perhaps for humanity) requires it.
Raskolnikov at the beginning (before the crime) sincerely believes that his crime will be committed "in the name of the salvation of mankind". Then he admits: “Freedom and power, and most importantly power! Over all the trembling creature, over the whole anthill! Here is the goal! .. " Subsequently, he explains to Sonya: "I wanted to become Napoleon, that's why I killed." He longed to be among those to whom "everything is allowed": "who dares a lot." Here is the last confession that defines his goal: “I didn’t kill to help my mother. Nonsense! I did not kill in order to, having received funds and power, become a benefactor of mankind. Nonsense! I just killed, killed for myself, for myself alone... I should have found out then and quickly found out whether I was a louse, like everyone else, or a man? Will I be able to cross or not!. . Am I a trembling creature, or do I have a right? »
The result and the means of the crime did not coincide with the lofty goals that he proclaimed. "The end justifies the means" - this is Raskolnikov's casuistry. But the hero did not have such a right goal. Here, the end does not justify the means, but points to the incorrectness, unsuitability of such means and results as murder. The theory of Rodion Raskolnikov broke down, collapsed.
Dostoevsky disagrees with Raskolnikov's philosophy. According to the author, permissiveness is terrible, inhumane and therefore unacceptable.
The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche created the theory of "blond beasts", "purebred Aryans". “People are divided into“ masters ”and“ slaves ”, - he said, - and to the masters -“ strong personalities ”,“ supermen ”- everything is allowed“. Following such a theory, these "supermen" have the right to disregard the law, morality, destroy and suppress everyone who gets in their way. Later, Nietzsche's theory served as the basis for the creation of a fascist ideology, which brought many misfortunes and disasters to all mankind.
The anti-humanity of Raskolnikov's theory is beyond doubt. It is clear and obvious that no end can justify the means, and even more so, "an end that requires the wrong means is not a right end."
For Dostoevsky, a deeply religious man, the meaning of human life was to comprehend the Christian ideals of love for one's neighbor.
The meaning of Raskolnikov's theory and the reasons for its collapse. The protagonist of the novel "Crime and Punishment", a poor student Rodion Raskolnikov, is convinced that the entire human race is divided into two unequal parts. The meaning of Raskolnikov’s theory and the reasons for its collapse in his article, written six months before the crime, he says that “people, according to the law of nature, are divided into two categories: the lower (ordinary), so to speak, into the material that serves solely to generate itself similar, and actually people, that is, those who have the gift or talent to say a new word in their environment. The meaning of the division into two categories is the assertion of the "right of the strong" to break the law and commit crimes. Raskolnikov speaks of loners towering above the crowd: this is “a superman who lives according to the law given to him by himself. If he needs, for his idea, to even step over a corpse, through blood, then he, in his conscience, can, in my opinion, give himself permission to step over blood.
Raskolnikov undertakes to prove in practice that he is an extraordinary person. He carefully considers and puts into execution a terrible plan: he kills and robs the old, stingy and insignificant pawnbroker Alena Ivanovna. True, at the same time, her quiet meek sister Lizaveta, who did no harm to anyone, accepts death. Raskolnikov failed to take advantage of the fruits of his crime, his conscience tormented him. But he himself believes in his theory even when he goes to confess to the murder, believing that he himself did not live up to expectations.
In Russia in the critical sixties, many were inclined to consider themselves people standing above others. In particular, the desire to enrich oneself with one blow was a natural manifestation of the spirit of profit that seized the big and petty bourgeoisie (in the novel this element is called Luzhin). Raskolnikov does not seek wealth and comfort, he wants to make humanity happy. He did not believe in socialist ideas and revolutionary struggle. He wanted to become such a ruler who would use strength and power to lead humanity out of humiliation into a bright paradise. For him, power is not an end in itself, but only a means of embodying an ideal.
At the same time, Raskolnikov himself does not notice how he violates his own rules. For a strong personality, there are no others, and he is always trying to do something for people (either giving meager money to the Marmeladovs, or trying to save a drunk girl on the boulevard). He has too much compassion. And although he brings the plan to the end, in Raskolnikov's soul a conscience is fighting, protesting against the shedding of blood, and reason, justifying the murder. This duality led to the collapse of Raskolnikov's idea. He wanted to become Napoleon and the Messiah, the Savior, in one person. But tyrant and virtue do not mix. Raskolnikov's idea did not justify itself precisely because Rodion, crushed by hunger, illness, poverty, turned out to be a living and conscientious person, ready to take responsibility for his actions.
Through the "fair" distribution of wealth, it was born in an atmosphere characteristic of that period. On the one hand - honest, decent people, turned by extreme poverty into "trembling creatures", on the other - a useless, but very rich "louse", sucking the blood of those very honest people. Moreover, new, completely unformed, often devoid of the foundations of morality and spirituality, ideas add fuel to the fire.
To emphasize the (apparent) rightness of Raskolnikov, Dostoevsky deliberately scatters pictures of grief and poverty throughout the novel, thereby reinforcing the painful feeling of hopelessness. The last straw, which overflowed the cup of patience and led to the fact that Raskolnikov's theory moved from the stage of abstract reflections to the stage of practical implementation, was Marmeladov's confession and a letter from his mother. The moment has come to materialize the idea long nurtured by the hero in his miserable closet: this is the blood of conscience, which the chosen ones (including him) are allowed to shed.
Raskolnikov's theory was both dependent on and in conflict with the then popular positivist theories of G. Spencer, D. S. Mill, N. G. Chernyshevsky. All of them relied on economic benefits and material comforts, prosperity.
Dostoevsky believed that the consciousness, constantly filled with such categories, loses the need for Christian virtues, for high spirituality. His hero is trying to connect both sides. He dreamed that a person would show egocentrism within reasonable limits, and that he would not become a slave of modern economic relations, would not be too immersed in his
Raskolnikov's theory, put into practice, revealed to the hero himself a paradoxical neighborhood in his soul of love for people and contempt for them. He considers himself a chosen one who has the right (and even must) kill in order to benefit not only himself, but all of humanity. And here he suddenly realizes that he is attracted by power for the sake of power itself, by the desire to dominate others.
In order to somehow justify his hard-won ideas, Raskolnikov cites as an example some legislators who were not even stopped by blood. However, their actions do not seem meaningful and saving, on the contrary, they strike with senseless destruction for the sake of the best. Such a train of thought of Rodion does not ennoble his ideas, as he wanted, but only exposes them and leads to the same assessment that Porfiry Petrovich gave to everything that happens. He defined the criminal as an individual who deifies himself, while belittling the personalities of other people, and encroaches on their lives.
The absurd theory of Raskolnikov and its collapse is seen by Dostoevsky as a natural event. He showed how the vagueness of the saving and beneficence of a new idea, its uncertainty can serve as a kind of psychological veil capable of lulling even a person's conscience in order to destroy, blur the boundaries between the concepts of good and evil.
Raskolnikov's theory and its collapse also has a historical side. It shows how ambiguous certain historical innovations can be, how prudence and good manners can be inversely proportional to the law "I".
The author does not describe the spiritual revival of the protagonist in the same detail as his spiritual ordeals, however, outlines the contours. Raskolnikov gradually realizes the essence of his idea, its fatality, its real meaning. He tests the strongest and is ready for repentance, ready from now on to be guided in his life only by the commandments of the Gospel. According to Dostoevsky, only sacrificial, giving love, and not abstract, for all of humanity, but concrete, for a concrete neighbor, is capable of restoring a human appearance in a hero. For Raskolnikov, such salvation is the compassionate love between him and
