Are there any other fans who disagree with Dostoevsky's philosophy?

[RodionRaskolnikov]

I do. I still love him for his storytelling ability and his insight into his characters' psychology, but I disagree with him on several points. For one, I hold a more determinist view and find it difficult to believe in free will (although I do feel at times like I'd like to be proven wrong on this point). I'm also an atheist, so I disagree with him on spiritual matters, too (although I don't hold religion to be an inherently bad thing in it of itself, and I do think there are aspects of Christianity which are incredibly advanced even today, such as the idea of turning the other cheek and forgiving your enemies).

I do share some of his views, particularly his belief in redemption and forgiveness, but still, I do disagree with him on the subject of religion and free will, which seem to be the central to most of his novels (those I've read anyway). I was wondering if anyone else is in the same boat? I find it interesting that there are people like Nietzsche, Einstein, and Freud, whose beliefs are so drastically different from Dostoevsky's, yet still greatly admired him and felt a strong connection with his work.

[carnage_complex]

    Dostoevsky caused me to challenge a lot of the deeply entrenched religious convictions (or lack thereof) that I have had since childhood.  I learned from his works that those who identify themselves as atheists often turn out to be the strongest believers...Kirillov, for instance.  Though not raised in the Orthodox faith, I find myself strongly inclined to agree with much of what he said about Roman Catholicism, German Protestantism, and Islam.  Actually, I too have often found Protestantism as a whole to be a very 'reactionary' sort of alignment...most churches that I have seen in my life have ceased to be places of spiritual solidarity completely, and instead have become something more along the lines of community centres.
    I also believed long before reading Dostoevsky for the first time that a monarchy (not a constitutional monarchy, mind you) is the best mode of government.  I believe that restoring the crown in Russia particularly could probably solve a lot of the country's problems.  Like Dostoevsky, I believe that it is very important to eliminate all barriers and allow the working class to petition their ruler directly. 
    Having never been to the Orthodox Church, I have a difficult time with sanctioning the faith as a theological ideal as such, though it seems like an interesting alternative based on what I know to date about it.  Also, like Dostoevsky, I believe that freedom is NOT tantamount to an elimination of all social stratums.  Masters and servants should be on cordial terms and recognize one another as mutually important.
    At one time, I was a member of a student discussion group which was very similar to the Petrashevsky Circle.  Each person brought their own respective economic theorems to the table, which did everybody the sum of no good.  This group could readily be likened to the one that the 'ridiculous man' departs from shortly prior to meeting the little girl.  I was very disillusioned with it early on, and held a lot of the same opinions that Dostoevsky likely would have done in my place.
    Also, I find myself agreeing with a lot of what Dostoevsky had to say about family values, particularly 'accidental' families like the Karamazovs.  The divorce rate today is out of control, and I honestly hope that my generation (given the fact that many of us have been raised in dysfunctional homes) will do something to combat this trend. 
    Though I find it difficult to sanction Dostoevsky's indemnities towards Jews, I do find myself wondering what he might have had to say about particular cases that have been prominent in the news lately...take Bernard Madoff, for instance.  I do not condemn Dostoevsky for holding those views, as they were in fact very prevalent during his particular era and beliefs to the contrary were more commonly held by radical student youth ('nihilists').  Oh, and I also can't stand women who smoke.
    So, I'm rather astonished to determine just how much of a social conservative that I apparently am.  'Conservative' tends to be a word that sticks in your throat before age 30 or so in most cases, but I really do agree with much of what he had to say.
 

[Stranger]

Here's another question; Does Dostoevsky agree with himself? Reading his works, I have to conclude that one very big reason that he has had so much impact is that he doesn't really know anything except that he doesn't know much. Socratic irony. In any case, for those that honestly seek truth, D's style hits home because it's so honest.

Obviously, D is a very good writer on a technical level as well, and obviously he "knew" a great many things in one sense of the word, but yeah, I think what I said still applies.

[mike14sabat]

Here's another question; Does Dostoevsky agree with himself? Reading his works, I have to conclude that one very big reason that he has had so much impact is that he doesn't really know anything except that he doesn't know much. Socratic irony. In any case, for those that honestly seek truth, D's style hits home because it's so honest.

Obviously, D is a very good writer on a technical level as well, and obviously he "knew" a great many things in one sense of the word, but yeah, I think what I said still applies.

Dostoevsky is not totally agree with him on all point. But his all impact quite positive. 

[RomanRussia]

 You cannot agree or either disagree with philosophy....Philosophy is philosophy it is as it is. It just depends on how deep it is. Hope this helps