Theodicy and Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov Essays

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, in his commencement address to Harvard University entitled “A World Split Apart,” warns of the decline of Western society. Solzhenitsyn begins by indicating that he intends to impart truth upon his audience, though it may be bitter, insisting “that it comes not from an adversary but from a friend” (1). This implies he is about to discuss a controversial topic in such a way that is not likely to be received kindly. His ultimate purpose is to encourage a return to religion and spirituality, connoting this to be the only means of redemption for the West. Solzhenitsyn utilizes an insightful yet urgent tone in order to convey to his audience the direness of the situation.

Dostoevsky litters the novel with the biblical allusion of Lazarus. Sonia disseminates the legend to the largely agnostic Raskolnikov: “ ‘And when he thus spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth’” (Dostoevsky 328). This reference to Lazarus serves to foreshadow Raskolnikov’s own redemption. In fact, Raskolnikov

This essay features the discussion of the problem of evil in relation to the existence of god. Specifically outlining two sections where the problem of evil is discussed from atheist and theistic viewpoint.

Ivan seems to be against organized religion and God because he directs all of his anger toward Yeshua. It isn’t Yeshua that Ivan is mad at, he is discontent with the fact that Yeshua allowed humans to have free will. By giving humans free will, Yeshua ultimately caused destruction to humanity due to human nature and the lack of morality of humans when they were given the ability to have free will. In Dostoevsky’s

No religion is mandatory nor is it required to conform to any particular religion or faith. Anyone is free to rebel against faith. In Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Grand Inquisitor, Ivan presents a poem to his younger brother that exposes the flaws of faith and Christ. Ivan exposes the flaws through a character called The Grand Inquisitor, who tears apart Christ’s decisions in The Three Temptations and the Inquisitor corrects Christ’s mistakes. The poem is structured and organized in a way that each Temptation is examined thoroughly through the eyes of The Inquisitor, resulting in the Inquisitor bashing Christ’s flaws and proposing a convincing persuasion.

     Friedrich Nietzsche once said, “Dostoevsky, the only one who has taught me anything about psychology.” The two writers share many similarities and differences. Dostoevsky clearly had an effect on the thinking of Nietzsche. The two would be considered both philosophers and psychologists. Both writers became prominent in the late 19th century in Germany and Russia respectively. Dostoevsky was noted for his Russian literary classics and would be responsible for a flowering of late 19th century Russian literary culture. His Russian contemporaries include Leo Tostoy and Anton Chekov. Dostoevsky’s most famous works include The Brothers Karamozov, The Idiot, and Crime and Punishment.

“Nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom.” –The Grand Inquisitor” “Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.” - Father Zosima. These two quotes voice the polarized philosophies that impregnate the book, The Brothers Karamazov. Ivan, the second of the three sons, and Zosima, the old monk, are huge commentators on the question, “Is the burden of free will to much for a human to bear?”

owe to prove his thesis about the problems of evil and atheism, Rowe asks three fundamental questions. The first question, “is there an argument for atheism based on the problem of evil that could rationally justify atheism?” Supporting his question, Rowe by uses the idea of human and animal suffering.is it reasonable for omnipotent, omniscient being(s) to permits its creation to suffer by extinguish each other for their own personal benefits. If there is such a thing as an omnibenevolent, omnipotent holy being how come the ultimate and unescapable suffering is this world has no vanish. How good is a god(s) that permits humanity to suffer greatly? In religious Christian Bible study, Jesus, many times referred to as god, vanish evil from

William Rowe defines gratuitous evil as an instance of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse.(Rowe 335) In a world with so much evil it raises the questions If God is all powerful, all knowing and all good, how can he allow bad things to happen to good people? Can God even exist in a world with so such gratuitous evil? These are questions that has afflicted humanity for a very long time and has been the question to engross theologians for centuries. The existence of evil has been the most influential and powerful reason to disprove the existence of God. It is believed among many theist that God is the creator and caretaker

The problem of evil has been around since the beginning. How could God allow such suffering of his “chosen people”? God is supposedly all loving (omni-benevolent) and all powerful (omnipotent) and yet He allows His creations to live in a world of danger and pain. Two philosophers this class has discussed pertaining to this problem is B.C. Johnson and John Hick. Johnson provides the theists’ defense of God and he argues them. These include free will, moral urgency, the laws of nature, and God’s “higher morality”. Hick examines two types of theodicies – the Augustinian position and the Irenaeus position. These positions also deal with free will, virtue (or moral urgency), and the laws of nature. Johnson

The impression given is one of suffering. Dostoyevsky tried to create an image so vile that the reader could not conceive of a worse situation. The image Fyodor created relates directly to his personal thoughts that poverty leads to suffering. Another time this is expressed in the novel is when Raskolnikov was walking on a bridge and the woman gave him money in the name of god. Other than the obvious symbolism of Raskolnikov rejecting religion here

Often times in literature, we are presented with quintessential characters that are all placed into the conventional categories of either good or bad. In these pieces, we are usually able to differentiate the characters and discover their true intentions from reading only a few chapters. However, in some remarkable pieces of work, authors create characters that are so realistic and so complex that we are unable to distinguish them as purely good or evil. In the novel Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoevsky develops the morally ambiguous characters of Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov to provide us with an interesting read and to give us a chance to evaluate each character.

"Dostoevsky and His Theology" was written by a man named James Townsend. It was posted online on September 2, 2012, and published on a official Russian educational website. The author of the articles appears to have been very well educated, and he displayed a very thorough understanding of the topic that he was discussing. At the end of the article, Townsend sited several independent works from credible individuals that discuss Dostoevsky, Dostoevsky's novels, Dostoevsky's religion, and several other essays that analyze and examine the Russian culture and famous Russian novelists. All of these sources were published pieces that came from Universities, like Princeton and Cambridge; experts, and include Dostoevsky's novels as well. In the way

           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

In his article “Men Have Forgotten God,” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn writes about how after several events in world history, corruption is rampant and conscious is dissipated. Using atheism as a base reason, he explains how the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and World War Two became bases for forms of hatred. He also mentions that people everywhere have become hardened to the things of this world, and the results of the hatred formed on atheism. In contrast, he mentions the fact that in Russia, a “pious way of life” was sought, and a true Christian church was the norm of the country. Atheism, in his mind, was a poison that has seeped through the world, slowly changing the very fabric that people’s foundations are based upon. In order to understand Solzhenitsyn’s thinking, mankind must understand atheism and all of its effects on the people surrounded by it.