February 13, 2005
ACCIDENTAL ADVOCATE:
Dostoyevsky's Disregarded Prophecy: The famous Russian author shows us what's to fear in a world without God. (Collin Hansen, 02/11/2005, Christianity Today)
Possibly his most prophetic book, Crime and Punishment details how Raskolnikov, the book's main character, kills two women and wrestles with the moral and psychological effects. Inwardly struggling to justify his crime, Raskolnikov writes an article that cites Napoleon's and Mohammed's bloodshed to argue that "extraordinary" men transcend law. His friends discuss the article's implications: "In his article all men are divided into 'ordinary' and 'extraordinary.' Ordinary men have to live in submission, have no right to transgress the law, because, don't you see, they are ordinary. But extraordinary men have a right to commit any crime and to transgress the law in any way, just because they are extraordinary." Unaware of Raskolnikov's guilt, a friend then turns to him. "That was your idea, if I am not mistaken?"Raskolnikov, though, faulted himself for not living up to this "ideal." He couldn't dodge the guilt. But this idea was more than just the ranting of a guilt-ridden killer. The theory had gained wide hearing in Dostoyevsky's day. Friedrich Nietzsche further legitimized the idea of a "superman" unrestrained by Christian values. A superman refuses "antiquated" notions of right and wrong, recognizing only those values that help him get ahead.
Even if you don't recognize these theories, you recognize their effect. Dostoyevsky's beloved Russia eventually succumbed to revolutionary fervor in 1917, and "supermen" Lenin and Stalin justified their murderous barbarism by appealing to visions of communist utopia. Competing forms of superman ideology clashed during World War II, pitting Hitler's genocidal eugenics against Soviet aspirations. Today Osama bin Laden, while not secular, excuses his murder of innocents by claiming a superior morality. [...]
Dostoyevsky never shies away from these problems of evil. But even after posing difficult challenges to the Christian faith, he refuses to provide tidy answers. He prefers to illustrate consequences, reminding us what a world without God looks like.
It's because the answers are tidy but are not included in the works, except as afterthoughts, that these books became prescriptions rather than proscriptions. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 13, 2005 6:15 PM
I think Dostoyevsky can be faulted for certain things, but promoting leftist nihilism isn't one of them. His books depict the awful consequences of radicalism in gory detail; you might even say he saw what was coming to Russia. Malcolm Muggeridge said The Devils was the greatest piece of prohecy regarding the "great liberal death wish" that he had ever come across.
Dostoyevsky provided answers, it's just that some people find them incomplete or too heavily reliant on unquestioning faith.
Posted by: Matt Murphy at February 13, 2005 9:12 PMNietzsche and Dostoyevsky are not complementary figures.
Nietzsche is part and parcel of the tobogan ride to hell that was German philosophy. The efforts of his apologists to excuse him -- "he wasn't really an anti-semite, he really just hated christians" is typical -- are extended to Heiddiger who joined the Nazi's and his bitch, Hannah Arendt.
Dostoyevsky saw the same storm clouds that Neitzsche did, but unlike the German madman, the Russian was made of sterner stuff and though his faith was tested it was not lost. He is able to see that without God mankind is in a moral desert. And that socialism promises slavery not freedom. But his vision is far more moral, far more compelling, far more humane and far more spiritual that that of the syphlitic German madman who has such a huge cult following on American campuses today.
One of the first signs of recovery in academia will be when Neitzsche is jetisoned from syllabuses and replaced by Dostoyevsky.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 14, 2005 3:22 AM