How Does Raskolnikov Use Moral Nihilism

In Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment Raskolnikov comes from a poor family and went to Petersburg in order to study. After a while Raskolnikov becomes destitute, living miserably. Raskolnikov is prideful, stubborn, and charismatic,which makes him an interesting character. Raskolnikov’s deep pride is one reason for him killing Alyona the old pawnbroker. Yet, Raskolnikov believed that killing Alyona would help humanity and take away evil from society. Such sentiments are spoken by a man he overhears, “"Kill her, take her money and with the help of it devote oneself to the service of humanity and the good of all. What do you think, would not one tiny crime be wiped out by thousands of good deeds?" With strong intentions on helping others, he is

Raskolnikov, the main character of the novel Crime and Punishment by Feodor Dostoevsky, actually possesses two completely contradicting personalities. One part of him is intellectual: cold, unfeeling, inhumane, and exhibiting tremendous self-will. It is this side of him that enables him to commit the most terrible crime imaginable - taking another human life. The other part of his personality is warm and compassionate. This side of him  does charitable acts and fights against the evil in his society.

When Raskolnikov was a student he enjoyed the debate and human contact, but also strived for acceptance. He had a dual nature to himself, which could be characterized by his cold intelligence, which separated him from society, and his compassionate side. After Raskolnikov murdered Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna

Raskolnikov is alway on high alert as he is afraid he will get caught, and he even gets to the point of lying to himself. Therefore, by doing this Raskolnikov thinks it is the truth and will do anything that he wants within his reason. In the book Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Raskolnikov's desire to murder someone caused him to use utilitarianism. This utilitarianism is used when Raskolnikov thinks some things are right such as; killing, planning out murder, hiding the truth, and manipulating. First, Raskolnikov shows signs of using utilitarianism when he plans and kills Alyona Ivanovna.

Through Raskolnikov’s exemplification of the impracticality of this principle\, Dostoevsky makes his greatest point in Crime and Punishment. His commentary on the subject seeks to discredit the theory in the circumstance of an individual “superman” by displaying Raskolnikov as a character who is difficult for readers to identify with because of his inanity. Even Raskolnikov’s name is a symbol of nihilistic ideas, the word “raskol” meaning schism in Russian, illustrating the shift from an older school of thought (social utopianism) to a darker philosophy: nihilism and utilitarianism. Raskolnikov seems to fluctuate back and forth between the two philosophies, acting on one and then mentally chastising himself for it, immediately and almost erratically changing his mind. This symbolizes the more human side of him struggling

In the novel, Raskolnikov’s crime, and his justification of the crime, display very nihilistic ideas. Nihilism argues that life does not have a purpose or an objective meaning. Moral nihilists’ views are that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived (Stick 332). Dostoyevsky uses Raskolnikov’s nihilistic character to criticize the principles of nihilism; Dostoyevsky uses Raskolnikov to prove that nihilistic ideas do not work and only deteriorate society. Many nihilistic figures during the mid 19th century loathed the character Raskolnikov for criticizing and making their principles seem foolish. The nihilistic thinkers claimed that murder for no reason, or rather murder just for the sake of murdering, was completely out of the nihilistic realm and did not have anything to do with their thoughts and principles.

Life is not easy, which Fyodor Dostoevsky makes very clear in his novel Crime and Punishment. In life, you encounter people that you find admirable. People who persevere, making tough decisions even though they may not be easy, or benefit themselves in any way. Those are the Razumikhins, and Sonyas of our world. Honorable (sometimes to a fault), willing to sacrifice themselves to help those they love. They embody what virtue theory followers believe. Unfortunately, you will also encounter people who are not wonderful. There are awful, disgusting people that take advantage and exert their power over others. Those are the Luzhins and the Svidrigailovs of the world. People like them will not hesitate to use their wealth or power to bend those they wish to take advantage of, forcing others to submit to their will. Ruining people, or making others feel terrible about themselves, or taking what they think they are entitled to because they believe it is their right. These are the type of people that display features of ethical egoism. Raskolnikov finds himself constantly drifting between these two extremes. He may do something good, then when it causes more trouble than he intended, he berates himself instead. Raskolnikov is a very conflicted character, and after murdering Alyona, and her sister Lizaveta with his axe he became even more conflicted. In a way, Raskolnikov kind of represents the everyday person (if you forget about murdering two people with an axe). The everyday

In order to understand Raskolnikov’s guilt, it is important to understand the religious influences at work in the time period and place he lived in. In St. Petersburg where Raskolnikov lives, there are strong Christian influences from the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Church condemns killing people with few exceptions. Although is not a devout believer, these influences are still at work in the book. It is clear that Raskolnikov is struggling to fight God away because, as he says that “once God’s will gets mixed up in it, nothing will be done” (389). He acknowledges that the guilt he has is God’s doing, and he struggles internally to get rid of it. The idea that he is not able to feel good about the murder that he knows improved society. He states that “what bothers [him] is this permission according to conscience” (253). Even though he wants to establish his own moral code, it is impossible for him to do so because of the influence of religion.

As Raskolnikov’s internal struggle becomes evident, Dostoevsky uses Raskolnikov’s disoriented state to illustrate nihilism’s ineffectiveness as a catalyst for social change. Raskolnikov’s radical philosophy is initially used as justification of his murder, a gambit to escape St. Petersburg’s poverty crisis. By labeling the pawnbroker Alyona Ivanovna as a “louse” and being largely apathetic towards any emotional or social repercussions, it is suggested that her death is for the greater good of not only Raskolnikov, but the whole of society; this lack of emotional substance in his logic brands him as a cold-blooded utilitarianist. However, it is a different story after the murder, where even Raskolnikov begins to doubt the legitimacy of his own argument. He realizes that his adrenaline rush prevents him from stealing much of the pawnbroker’s money, and with what he does manage to salvage, it is hidden away, nullifying any constructive benefit he had hoped to provide. Additionally, the murder of the pawnbroker’s innocent sister Lizaveta, whom prior to the even Raskolnikov feels

However, Dostoevsky does not hold Raskolnikov completely accountable for the emotional and social defects that lead up to his crime, ultimately outlining his beliefs on how man should be punished. Dostoevsky makes apparent the idea that Raskolnikov at times acts out of his own control, seemingly under the influence of a higher power. Before his murder, he pleads to be stopped by God or any influence, but “in spite of his dread, he was driven into crime, like a mere tool of Fate” (Lavrin 31). He is used by Dostoevsky to make an example and represent all of man at times. During the murder, Dostoevsky describes the event as though Raskolnikov were possessed, “He seemed not to use his own strength in this. But as soon as he had once again brought

Raskolnikov lives an ordinary life as an ordinary man. He is a good man and has a good heart, but he soon commits a crime that will forever change his life. Raskolnikov is a good man; I believe he is kind, generous, and selfless. Now, how are all of these positive traits found in a murderer? I think was caught in a psychotic moment, his mental state was not all there, and he had a dream, he made a plan, and he committed this terrible crime. A good example of Raskolnikov being a kind hearted person, and selfless is when he sees a young girl at the end of the street, he sees by her a rough looking man staring at her. He starts to get very worried what this man might do to this young girl. He goes down the street to get this young girl, and he pays for a taxi to get her home. This was so generous, and small yet so impactful. Raskolnikov cared about what might happen to this young girl, and did something about it. This showed how selfless Raskolnikov is, and what a kind heart he has. I think this shows Raskolnikov’s true character. From here, he makes some terrible decisions, and is engulfed by guilt, but I believe he is a generous, kindhearted person. In this book, Crime And Punishment, Raskolnikov goes from being an ordinary man with an ordinary life to a murderer, tortured by guilt, haunted by the memory of his crime, and him finding himself again in society after the murders.

Being the protagonist in Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov is subject to most ridicule and analysis for his moral ambiguity and outlandish views. After reading about his dreadful murder of Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna, many come to the conclusion that Raskolnikov is purely evil. His lack of guilt and belief of justification for his crime surely points readers in this direction. Raskolnikov remains convinced that he is superior and that it was his duty to kill such a worthless person. Although some may view this as evilness, others may perceive it as downright ignorant. His atypical way of thinking doesn’t necessarily make him evil, but that is how some comprehend it. At certain points in the story, we see Raskolnikov not as a deranged man, but instead as a compassionate human being. After the murder, we see him carrying out various charitable acts, perhaps as an attempt to atone for his unforgivable crime. For example, we see some good in him when he gives Sonya’s family twenty rubbles after Marmeladov passes on. We also see this when he attempts to rescue a drunk girl from a man by giving her money for a taxi. As much as Raskolnikov expresses that he was justified in his actions, through his mental and physical illnesses it is apparent that he feels some guilt about it. This guilt makes him seem at least a little bit more human. For these reasons, when all is said and done, it is difficult to determine

Raskolnikov expresses belief that some people are above the law. In fact, he published an article which established that some “extraordinary” people have the right to “step over certain obstacles”. Raskolnikov believes himself to be one of these extraordinary people. He wonders what it would be like if Napoleon, for example, had played by the rules. Would he have made such an impact on the world? It is this very utilitarian belief that drives Raskolnikov to kill Alyona Ivanovna, and consequently her sister Lizaveta as well. He believes that the pawnbroker Alyona Ivanovna is a louse, “a useless, nasty, pernicious louse.” By ridding the world of Alyona, he thinks he is helping many others.

           There are many different types of crimes that happen within the novel itself and it is evident that the authors Christian beliefs influenced the very background of the characters and crimes committed. The main character in the novel, Raskolnikov, has a very unique religious outlook for the time period in which he lived. Raskolnikov was raised in a Christian family which he eventually outgrew and followed new beliefs. He was not necessary a nihilist because he believed in a higher morality and nihilists did not have any sense of morality. He did however, have a sense of direction in regard to utilitarian motives. Very early on in the novel, Raskolnikov receives a letter from his mother in which she makes a remark acknowledging that he has strayed from religion but she still prays for him. Reading this letter causes Raskolnikov much pain and even though it is not blatantly acknowledged, it is sensed that Raskolnikov has some bitterness toward the idea of returning to religion. By making Raskolnikov’s character non-religious, Dostoevsky

Dostoyevsky gives the reader no such comfort. The reader wants to see Raskolnikov have some good excuse for killing the old woman, some sense of moral justification of the act so we can turn his accusers into "bad guys" and himself and his friends the "good guys". The reader gets nothing of the sort, Crime and Punishment is no fairy tale. The suspense in Crime and Punishment is caused by Dostoyevsky's superb characters, and the longing for a moral sense of right and wrong.