Recent Posts

[/quote]
Excellent post, Rimbaud.  It's also important to note that liberalism and socialism forces people, even against their will, to be "charitable" (through the government taking money and providing for those more in need).  However, this isn't "charity" - in fact, it destroys man's ability to be charitable to his fellow man because someone else is demanding his money and then moving it elsewhere against his will.  Charity was never meant to be carried out by the State, but rather by the Church and individuals out of the goodness of their hearts.
[/quote]

Right  , such is the corollary of Compulsion compared to Volition.

Dostoyevsky was very critical of Socialism. He simply didn't believe it could be tenable, not could it ever sustain itself in the admist of human suffering and will to power - those tendencies which want and produce individuality and personality. Ostensibly it is the 'I vs Collective' but it branches of into other anthropological and theological areas : One, it deals with man's relationship to suffering. If man cannot bare suffering, he will want to erase his suffering and identity. Kierkegaard said ' the torment of despair is that the despair cannot terminate consciousness. This is why it is very sinister, in my opinion, that the rise of legal medication for depression and medical disorders have rapidly risen while we enter a socialist age. It is also one of the reasons literature itself is ridiculed and dying. Because man doesn't want introspection anymore. 'Why would an ant need or want introspection?' And secondly, the social controllers can only fit man into their system where suffering and will to power is eradicated and Dostoyevsky and Nietzche saw this very early on and were very worried about it, as am I, and is one of the reasons for the general debasement of values and discipline in modern society, not to mention, the neurological, and subtle biological and chemical conditioning. - As one would control an ant hill.

Dostoyevsky, even in the darkly humourous 'Notes of the underground' is imploringly arguing about man's volition and self will. Man has a right to build, but he must be allowed to destroy it. He must be able to say 2+2 is 4 is a fine number, but just as fine is 2+2 is 5! He must be able to live for a reason more than bread alone. A reason more than his instinctual needs being satisfied. Not forgetting, this is also an argument out of and which leads to Freud's dichotomy between the pleasure and reality principle.

If we end 'alienation and suffering' and become communist, or socialist, the consequences are for all to see. We also degrade our individuality, and freedom.

Edit : I would also extend this critique to liberalism, and liberal values, which have the most corrosive affects upon personality and society under ' Tolerance, equality, and promiscuity.' Which alwas invetiably end in either authoritarianism from the right or left. I also think they are weak ideas and critiques in general, and are edifices that arise from pity.

Excellent post, Rimbaud.  It's also important to note that liberalism and socialism forces people, even against their will, to be "charitable" (through the government taking money and providing for those more in need).  However, this isn't "charity" - in fact, it destroys man's ability to be charitable to his fellow man because someone else is demanding his money and then moving it elsewhere against his will.  Charity was never meant to be carried out by the State, but rather by the Church and individuals out of the goodness of their hearts.

This is not meant to be spam. The biggest adaptation to date is a 1995 version directed by Gary Walkow. While it's not anywhere near perfect it's also not completely horrible, you can also find a few other smaller versions online etc. But everyone seems to miss the point, it's an existential novel and while that is difficult to translate on film it's not impossible. A new movie is in the works and if you love the book and want to see it done correctly please take a second and check out this page. http://www.indiegogo.com/Notes-from-Underground Any support is much appreciated and will help this get made! Also if you know others that might want to participate. PLEASE share the link. Thank you. http://www.indiegogo.com/Notes-from-Underground

It's been so long since I've even thought about Dostoevsky - good starting place would be The Double if you're into psychological themes. I remember reading somewhere that this influenced Carl Jung's archetype of "the shadow." Also to reply to Slovenly Old Man - did you notice that Christian Bale's character was reading The Idiot in one scene? Nice.

Cormac MCcarthy is similar to Dostoyevsky. He is a very nihilist existentialist always asking the big questions : of God, violence, war and man. Whom is also very similar to Melville.

Dostoyevsky was very critical of Socialism. He simply didn't believe it could be tenable, not could it ever sustain itself in the admist of human suffering and will to power - those tendencies which want and produce individuality and personality. Ostensibly it is the 'I vs Collective' but it branches of into other anthropological and theological areas : One, it deals with man's relationship to suffering. If man cannot bare suffering, he will want to erase his suffering and identity. Kierkegaard said ' the torment of despair is that the despair cannot terminate consciousness. This is why it is very sinister, in my opinion, that the rise of legal medication for depression and medical disorders have rapidly risen while we enter a socialist age. It is also one of the reasons literature itself is ridiculed and dying. Because man doesn't want introspection anymore. 'Why would an ant need or want introspection?' And secondly, the social controllers can only fit man into their system where suffering and will to power is eradicated and Dostoyevsky and Nietzche saw this very early on and were very worried about it, as am I, and is one of the reasons for the general debasement of values and discipline in modern society, not to mention, the neurological, and subtle biological and chemical conditioning. - As one would control an ant hill.

Dostoyevsky, even in the darkly humourous 'Notes of the underground' is imploringly arguing about man's volition and self will. Man has a right to build, but he must be allowed to destroy it. He must be able to say 2+2 is 4 is a fine number, but just as fine is 2+2 is 5! He must be able to live for a reason more than bread alone. A reason more than his instinctual needs being satisfied. Not forgetting, this is also an argument out of and which leads to Freud's dichotomy between the pleasure and reality principle.

If we end 'alienation and suffering' and become communist, or socialist, the consequences are for all to see. We also degrade our individuality, and freedom.

Edit : I would also extend this critique to liberalism, and liberal values, which have the most corrosive affects upon personality and society under ' Tolerance, equality, and promiscuity.' Which alwas invetiably end in either authoritarianism from the right or left. I also think they are weak ideas and critiques in general, and are edifices that arise from pity.

In The Brothers Karamazov, the young boy Kolya identifies himself as a socialist.  He is very forward with his views and lectures Alexey, who puts him off with a serence smile and wave of the hand that seems to indicate that not every youthful whim is deserving of a response or serious consideration. 

Never mind, I found the part where he fesses up and blames Ivan's personal philosophy for his actions.

Smed. himself admits to Ivan that he killed his father. He also blames Ivan for putting the idea of killing F Karamazov.

Really?  Where was that?

I absolutely love The Brothers Karamazov, and have been trying to find out about Dostoevsky's plans for The Life of a Great Sinner. There, unfortunately, is not much information readily available. My question is where I can learn about this unwritten work. Are there any books or published notebooks that detail what Dostoevsky's ideas were?  Has anybody here read anything pertaining to The Life of a Great Sinner?