Known classic F. M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment" - the story of a student who decided on a terrible crime. In the novel, the author touches on many social, psychological and philosophical issues that are relevant to modern society. Raskolnikov's theory has been manifesting itself for more than a dozen years.

What is Raskolnikov's theory?

The protagonist, as a result of long reflections, came to the conclusion that people are divided into two groups. The first includes individuals who can do whatever they want, regardless of the law. To the second group, he attributed people without rights, whose lives can be neglected. This is the main essence of Raskolnikov's theory, which is also relevant for modern society. Many people consider themselves superior to others, breaking laws and doing whatever they please. An example is the majors.

Initially main character works perceived his own theory as a joke, but the more he thought about it, the more real the assumptions seemed. As a result, he divided all the people around him into categories and evaluated only according to his own criteria. Psychologists have already proven that a person can convince himself of various things by thinking about them regularly. Raskolnikov's theory is a manifestation of extreme individualism.

Reasons for creating Raskolnikov's theory

Not only lovers of literature, but also experts in various fields carefully studied Dostoevsky's work in order to highlight the social and philosophical origins of Raskolnikov's theory.

The moral reasons that prompted the hero to commit a crime include the desire to understand what category of people he belongs to and pain for the humiliated poor.
There are other reasons for the emergence of Raskolnikov's theory: extreme poverty, the concept of life's injustice and the loss of one's own guidelines.

How did Raskolnikov arrive at his theory?

The protagonist himself throughout the novel is trying to understand what caused the terrible act. Raskolnikov's theory confirms that in order for the majority to live happily, the minority must be destroyed. As a result of long reflections and consideration of various situations, Rodion came to the conclusion that he belongs to the highest category of people. Literature lovers put forward several motives that prompted him to commit the crime:

influence environment and people;
desire to become great;
the desire to get money;
dislike for a harmful and useless old woman;
desire to test their own theory.

What does Raskolnikov's theory bring to the disadvantaged?

The author of "Crime and Punishment" wanted in his book to convey suffering and pain for all mankind. On almost every page of this novel, poverty and the rigidity of people can be traced. In fact, the novel, published in 1866, has much in common with modern society, which is increasingly showing its indifference to the neighbor. The theory of Rodion Raskolnikov confirms the existence of disadvantaged people who do not have a chance for a decent life, and the so-called "masters of life" with a big wallet.

What is the contradiction of Raskolnikov's theory?

The image of the protagonist consists of some inconsistencies that can be traced throughout the entire work. Raskolnikov is a sensitive person who is not alien to the grief of those around him, and he wants to help those in need, but Rodion understands that it is not in his power to change the way of life. In doing so, he proposes a theory that completely contradicts .

Finding out what the mistake of Raskolnikov's theory for the hero himself is, it is worth noting the fact that he expected it to help get out of the impasse and start living in a new way. In this case, the hero has achieved the exact opposite result, and he finds himself in an even more hopeless situation. Rodion loved people, but after the murder of the old woman, he simply cannot be near them, this applies even to his mother. All these contradictions show the imperfection of the proposed theory.

What is the danger of Raskolnikov's theory?

If we assume that the idea put forward by Dostoevsky through the thoughts of the protagonist has become large-scale, then the result for society and the world as a whole is very deplorable. The meaning of Raskolnikov's theory is that people who are superior to others in some criteria, for example, financial capabilities, can “clear” the road for their own good, doing whatever they want, including committing murder. If many people lived according to this principle, then the world would simply cease to exist, sooner or later, the so-called "competitors" would destroy each other.

Throughout the novel, Rodion experiences moral torment, which often takes on different forms. Raskolnikov's theory is dangerous because the hero is trying in every possible way to convince himself that his act was right, because he wanted to help his family, but he did not want anything for himself. A huge number of people commit crimes by thinking in this way, which in no way justifies their decision.

Pros and cons of Raskolnikov's theory

At first it may seem that there are no positive aspects to the idea of dividing society, but if you dismiss all the bad consequences, then there is still a plus - a person’s desire to be happy. Raskolnikov's theory of the right of a strong personality shows that many strive for a better life and are the engine of progress. As for the minuses, there are more of them, and they matter to people who share the views of the protagonist of the novel.

The desire to divide everyone into two classes, which can have terrible consequences, for example, such ideas are identical to Nazism. All people are different, but they are equal before God, so striving to be superior to others is wrong.
Another danger that Raskolnikov's theory brings to the world is the use of any means in life. Unfortunately, many people in modern world live on the principle of "the end justifies the means", which leads to terrible consequences.

What prevented Raskolnikov from living according to his theory?

The whole problem lies in the fact that, creating the “perfect picture” in his head, Rodion did not take into account the features real life. You can't make the world a better place by killing another person, no matter who they are. The essence of Raskolnikov's theory is clear, but it was not taken into account that the old pawnbroker was only the initial link in the chain of injustice, and by removing it, it is impossible to cope with all the world's problems. People who try to profit from the troubles of others, it is not correct to call the root of the problem, because they are only a consequence.

Facts confirming Raskolnikov's theory

In the world you can find a huge number of examples where the idea proposed by the protagonist of the novel was applied. One can recall Stalin and Hitler, who sought to cleanse the people of unworthy people, and what the actions of these people led to. Confirmation of Raskolnikov's theory can be seen in the behavior of wealthy youth, the so-called "majors", who, ignoring the laws, ruined the lives of many people. The protagonist himself commits a murder to confirm his idea, but in the end he understands the horror of the act.

Raskolnikov's theory and its collapse

In the work, not only appears, but also completely refuted a strange theory. To change his mind, Rodion has to go through a lot of mental and physical torment. Raskolnikov's theory and its collapse occurs after he sees a dream where people destroy each other and the world disappears. Then he begins to gradually return faith in goodness. As a result, he understands that everyone, regardless of their position, deserves to become happy.

Finding out how Raskolnikov's theory is refuted, it is worth citing one simple truth as an example - happiness cannot be built on crime. Violence, even if it can be justified by some lofty ideals, is evil. The hero himself admits that he did not kill the old woman, but destroyed himself. The collapse of Raskolnikov's theory was visible at the very beginning of her proposal, since the manifestation of inhumanity could not be justified.

Does Raskolnikov's theory live today?

No matter how sad it may sound, but the idea of dividing people into classes exists. Modern life is rigid and the principle "survival of the fittest" forces many to do things that do not correspond. If you conduct a survey of who today lives according to Raskolnikov's theory, then each person, most likely, will be able to cite some personalities from his environment as an example. One of the main reasons for this state of affairs is the importance of money, which rules the world.

It so happened that not a single person can stop thinking. Each of us throughout our lives thinks, reasons, builds castles in the air or pragmatically draws up a plan for further actions. At the same time, not a single original, fresh thought comes to someone’s head, and someone, without any effort (or, perhaps, having undergone incredible mental anguish), invents, composes, becomes the creator of a new idea, theory, never before moment that did not arise in the human mind.

So, theories are born in different ways, but have no value without practical application. However, in order to bring them to life, you must first deeply and sincerely believe in them. So did the hero of the novel F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment" Rodion Raskolnikov. He was proud of his idea, amused himself with it like his favorite toy, until a certain moment he blindly believed in its correctness and, even after going through all the trials, did not completely abandon it. So what is the obvious strength of Raskolnikov's theory? And what is it all about - "the power of theory"?

I believe that the strength of any idea lies in its ability to captivate not an individual, but the whole society, in its attractiveness, relevance and, perhaps, in the originality of the thoughts and views of its creator. This means that all the attributes of power and authority belong to Raskolnikov's theory. Indeed, the way people are divided into creators and material, "ordinary" and capable of saying "a new word" cannot be called well-known or simply banal.

However, not only this explains the attractiveness of the theory. It is important that it is too plausible, deceptive, but at the same time tangibly fair. Raskolnikov's theory captivates by the very fact that it justifies and even encourages inhumanity, allows breaking the law, committing crimes in pursuit of one's own benefit, the benefit of a being, allegedly "extraordinary", brilliant and strong. Thus, it turns out that someone who has a gift or talent, “... if he needs, for his idea, to step over at least a corpse, through blood, then inside himself, in conscience, can ... give himself permission to step over blood ... ".

Thus, it turns out that someone who has a gift or talent, “... if he needs, for his idea, to step over at least a corpse, through blood, then inside himself, in conscience, can ... give himself permission to step over blood ... ".

Such arguments are extraordinarily tempting, they easily spread their influence over a large number of people, just because it is unlikely that there are those among us who do not consider themselves at least a little bit of genius or, in extreme cases, talented! Raskolnikov's theory is thought out to such an extent, supported by evidence, that it is difficult to disagree with it.

But it is doubly difficult to agree. Why? Yes, because the strengths of this theory hide its weaknesses. This means that only cruel, absolutely unprincipled people can follow the path found by Raskolnikov, that, so tempting in words, the theory is not capable of being realized without significant reservations and "side effects".

It turns out that the negative consequences of translating the idea into reality outweigh all the expected positive ones.

The reader notices: Raskolnikov’s answer to Porfiry Petrovich does not sound very convincing, who is worried about what will happen if “... one of one [lower] category imagines that he belongs to another category and “begins to remove all obstacles.”

Also, Rodion's reasoning is sometimes illogical. For example, he deliberately confuses cause and effect, convincing everyone and himself that Napoleon succeeded only because he was cruel and did not stop at the blood. Raskolnikov does not think about the fact that everything could be the other way around, that those people who “in good conscience” allow themselves to commit crime were already born shameless and often deprived of talent, the very ability to say a “new word”.

It becomes clear: the creator of the theory himself distorts historical facts, refuses to take into account the psychology of the majority of people and their inclinations.

Moreover, by his example, the hero proves that “a man and a citizen” cannot follow this idea - the idea of inhumanity, since strength will certainly run out, the will will weaken, the old ideals will seem insignificant compared to the severity of the sin taken on the soul, be it murder, theft or other crime. Raskolnikov's theory is essentially criminal. It is weak in that it can be followed only by people who are insecure in themselves, who are afraid of difficult paths and hope that their conscience will not speak after committing an atrocity.

But these indecisive individuals overestimate their strength and are bound to be disappointed. Those who are persistent in spirit are either not interested in the idea, or have long been following the described path, while not repenting and not thinking about what kind of theory to create in order to justify themselves: a person is “... a louse for someone who doesn’t even think of it ... ".

These arguments prove that the way of life proposed by Raskolnikov is not relevant for most people, even if they themselves do not realize it, and the theory that no one needs, imperfect, inapplicable in practice, is known to be weak and has no right to exist.

In conclusion, you can try to imagine what the world would turn into if Raskolnikov’s theory was firmly entrenched in the minds of all people, how the confrontation of humanism, humanity, kindness, obedience and cruelty, selfishness, injustice, lurking in the idea outlined by Dostoevsky on the pages novel.

The answer to this question is given in the epilogue, it is enough to recall Raskolnikov's dream. After all, a pestilence from Asia is nothing more than a theory turned into reality. She, like a disease, would enslave the hearts of people, each of whom would think that "... in him alone lies the truth ...".

The terrible pictures of wars and destruction that swept through the visions of the sick Raskolnikov fully reflect the horrors that would have happened if this theory were really strong.

It is obvious that all the strengths are only extensions of the weakness of Rodion's idea. In fact, the weakness of Raskolnikov's theory is in its creator, in his own weaknesses. In spite of everything, this theory exists and will exist together with people - its adherents. But it is obviously unfair, evil, and its viability is explained by the immortal injustice of our world.

But, in my opinion, the idea itself is not worthy of occupying the present, spiritual man other than as an introduction; it is able to interest and reassure with its strength, but it can also, corroded from the inside, destroy and crush with its weakness.

Raskolnikov's theory is dangerous to some extent, the results of its application are varied and contradictory (depending on the individual qualities of the follower), but it remains deeply unfair, unrighteous and destroys the individual. In this corrupting force lies the most important weakness, which cannot be neglected.

Raskolnikov's theory was formed by chance: he accidentally overheard a conversation in a pub, and a peculiar substantiation of this idea arose in his head, created in him by the exceptionally difficult circumstances of his life.

Raskolnikov's thought had already dwelled on the question of the relativity in life of the concepts of good and evil. In the midst of humanity, Raskolnikov separated a small group of people who, as it were, stood above questions of good and evil, above ethical assessments of actions and deeds, people who, due to their genius, their high usefulness for humanity, nothing can serve as an obstacle to whom everything is allowed. The rest, who do not leave the circle of mediocrity, the mass, the crowd, must obey the existing general norms and laws and serve as a means of high goals for the chosen people. Moral rules do not exist for the latter, they can break them, because their ends justify their means.

This is how Raskolnikov substantiates the right of an exceptional person to commit crimes in the name of not animals and selfish, but general and lofty goals. Raskolnikov understands that such a course of action must also correspond to the special mental structure of the personality of a person who is ready to “transgress” morality. For this he must be the owner of a strong will, iron endurance, and in him over feelings of fear, despair, timidity, only the consciousness of the set intellectual goals should rule. Having fallen into despair and longing, Raskolnikov needs to prove to himself that he is not a “trembling creature”, that he dares, maybe that he is destined to go through all his plans. “Power is given only to those who dare to bend down and take it. There is only one thing: you just have to dare!”

Thus, the planned murder attracts Raskolnikov not with the possibility of enrichment, but as a victory over himself, as a confirmation of his strength, as proof that he is not “material” for construction, but the builder himself. Conceiving a crime, Raskolnikov goes entirely into the theorist, into philosophical reflections, and he is much more interested in logical conclusions than in the results of an act. He remains a theoretician, a thinker even when he fulfills all his plans. And, despite the fact that, as it seemed, he foresaw and foresaw everything in advance, he could not foresee the most important thing precisely because he is a man of thought, not action.

Need and the humiliation and insults associated with it for the proud young man served as one of the first impetuses for making a decision. Pawning his belongings with the usurer, Raskolnikov experienced disgust and anger, caused in him by the appearance and the whole atmosphere of the sinister old woman. And when one day he managed to accidentally overhear in a beer conversation two students about the murder, the arguments of one of them were, as it were, an echo of the unconscious conviction of Raskolnikov himself.

Although the student who defended this point of view so ardently confessed that he himself could not confirm it by action and would not have gone to murder, this thought sunk into Raskolnikov’s head, and he thought about it a lot. He also dwelled on the practical consequences of the crime: the old woman's money would give him the opportunity to graduate from the university, help his mother and sister, and begin activities useful to society. But then he is completely captured by his own theory about genius and the crowd, about people of strength and will, about builders-strong loners - and the crowd as material for buildings.

It becomes necessary for Raskolnikov to prove to himself at all costs that he has the strength and determination to justify his bold theory in practice. Completely overwhelmed by the feverish and persistent work of thought, exhausted by hunger, he becomes a victim of his obsession and, as hypnotized, no longer has the strength to tear himself away from the intended path.

At first he struggled with himself, something in him protested against his decision, the thought of murder filled him with longing and disgust. But then he somehow mechanically obeyed his idea, no longer in control of himself, but as if fulfilling someone else's will. “As if,” the author says, “someone took him by the hand and pulled him along, irresistibly, blindly, with unnatural force, without objection. It was as if he had hit a piece of clothing in the wheel of a car, and he began to be drawn into it.

Random external circumstances prompt him to carry out his plan. Having foreseen some trifles, Raskolnikov thought that he had discovered a complete preparation for a new life according to his "new morality". But the circumstances that unfolded after the accomplishment of the murder showed the theoretician that immediate life and its events have their own special logic, which crushes all the arguments and arguments of an abstract theory into dust. From his own terrible experience, Raskolnikov was convinced of the mistakes he had made.

Introduction

The novel "Crime and Punishment" was written and published by F.M. Dostoevsky in 1866, that is, shortly after the abolition of serfdom and the beginning of a change in the socio-economic system. Such a breakdown of social and economic foundations entails an indispensable economic stratification, that is, the enrichment of some at the expense of the impoverishment of others, the liberation of human individuality from cultural traditions, traditions and authorities. And as a result, crime.

Dostoevsky in his book denounces bourgeois society, which gives rise to all kinds of evil - not only those that immediately catch the eye, but also those vices that lurk in the depths of the human subconscious.

The protagonist of the novel is Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, in the recent past, a student at St. Petersburg University, found himself on the verge of poverty and social decline. He has nothing to pay for living, the wardrobe is so worn out that it is a shame for a decent person to go out into the street in it. You often have to go hungry. Then he decides to commit murder and justify himself with the theory of "ordinary" and "extraordinary" people, which he himself invented.

Drawing the miserable and wretched world of the St. Petersburg slums, the writer traces step by step how a terrible theory is born in the mind of the hero, how it takes possession of all his thoughts, pushing him to murder.

The essence of Raskolnikov's theory

Raskolnikov's theory is far from an accidental phenomenon. Throughout the 19th century, disputes about the role of a strong personality in history and its moral character did not stop in Russian literature. This problem became the most discussed in society after the defeat of Napoleon. The problem of a strong personality is inseparable from the Napoleonic idea. “Napoleon,” says Raskolnikov, “it wouldn’t have occurred to him to be tormented by the question of whether it was possible to kill an old woman, he would have slaughtered without any thought.”

Possessing a sophisticated analytical mind and painful pride. Raskolnikov quite naturally thinks about which half he himself belongs to. Of course, he likes to think that he -- strong personality, which, according to his theory, has the moral right to commit a crime in order to achieve a humane goal.

What is this goal? The physical destruction of the exploiters, to which Rodion ranks the malicious old woman-interest-bearer, who profited from human suffering. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with killing an old woman and using her wealth to help poor, needy people.

These thoughts of Raskolnikov coincide with the ideas of revolutionary democracy popular in the 60s, but in the theory of the hero they are bizarrely intertwined with the philosophy of individualism, which allows for "blood according to conscience", a violation of the moral norms accepted by most people. According to the hero, historical progress is impossible without sacrifice, suffering, blood, and is carried out by the mighty of this world, the great historical figures. This means that Raskolnikov dreams of both the role of ruler and the mission of a savior. But Christian, self-sacrificing love for people is incompatible with violence and contempt for them.

The protagonist believes that all people from birth, according to the law of nature, are divided into two categories: "ordinary" and "extraordinary". Ordinary must live in obedience and have no right to transgress the law. And the extraordinary have the right to commit crimes and transgress the law. This theory is very cynical in terms of all the moral principles that have evolved over many centuries with the development of society, but Raskolnikov finds examples for his theory. For example, this is the French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte, whom Raskolnikov considers “extraordinary”, because Napoleon killed many people in his life, but his conscience did not torment him, as Raskolnikov believes. Raskolnikov himself, retelling his article to Porfiry Petrovich, noted that “an extraordinary person has the right ... to allow his conscience to step over ... other obstacles, and only if the fulfillment of his idea (sometimes saving, perhaps for all mankind) requires it” .

According to Raskolnikov's theory, the first category includes conservative, orderly people, they live in obedience and love to be obedient. Raskolnikov claims "that they must be obedient, because this is their purpose, and there is absolutely nothing humiliating for them." The second category is breaking the law. The crimes of these people are relative and varied, they can "step even over a corpse, through blood" in order to fulfill their goals.

Conclusion: having created his theory, Raskolnikov hoped that his conscience would come to terms with his intention to kill a person, that after committing a terrible crime he would not torment, pester, exhaust his soul, but as it turned out, Raskolnikov doomed himself to torment, unable to cope with his in kind.

A few months before the crime, Raskolnikov left the university due to extreme need. At his forced leisure, he wrote an article in which he outlined the thought that had long occupied him about the nature of the crime, but the newspaper where he sent the article was closed, and, not knowing that the article was published in another publication, that you could get money for it, Raskolnikov, already without dinner for two weeks, he lives half-starving in his hut, like a coffin, with a low, “pressing the soul” ceiling.

He is tormented, according to Svidrigailov, by "irritation from hunger and a cramped apartment." Avoiding all acquaintances, "proudly and arrogantly" hiding his poverty from them, Raskolnikov in his solitude with painful constancy rethinks the thought that has settled in his head, and under the influence of external impressions it gradually takes on a concrete form, takes possession of his whole being. This idea is rooted in the soil of social inequality.

Having renounced the justification of serfdom, which has been put forward for centuries in defense of inequality, Raskolnikov thinks that “according to the law of nature” there are two categories of people: some “live in obedience and love to be obedient”, while others “everyone breaks the law, destroyers”, and if they need "for their idea", they can even "give themselves permission to step over the blood." Lycurgus, Solons, Mahomets, Napoleons used this right. And the Keplerians and Newtons would have the right to "eliminate9raquo; ten or a hundred people, if these ten or a hundred prevented the rest of mankind from taking advantage of their scientific discoveries.

The death of one, ten, a hundred people - and the well-being of the rest of humanity. Yes, here simple arithmetic confirms the right to “crime.” This, in the words of the investigator Porfiry Petrovich, "bookish dreams, theoretically irritated heart." But other influences join this, the influence of the era, "when the human heart was clouded, when the phrase is quoted that" blood refreshes ".

In the gloomy recesses of hereditary feudal cruelty and "inveterate idleness", Raskolnikov is swarming and teasing him simply with the desire to "try" what category of people he himself belongs to, "louse9raquo; he or "has the right" to transgress. But both theoretically cold reflections on the Newtonian right to "transgress" and a burning curiosity to test one's own "rights"9raquo; are covered in Raskolnikov's mind with more real and deeply penetrating impressions into his soul.

Marmeladov "drunk9raquo; with the money raised in such a terrible way; Sonya and her next sister with the prospect of a depraved life, disgusting illnesses and death on the street, and there, in the "remote and brutal" province, sister Dunya, ready to sell herself to Luzhin.

In the inflamed brain of Raskolnikov, a comparison of his sister and Sonya Marmeladova is some kind of obsession. Both will not leave the evil pit. Precisely because Raskolnikov himself lurked under the surface of pure theory and some other old evil spirits, he is afraid of any even external contact with vice. "A scoundrel gets used to everything." No, one must either renounce life, strangle everything in oneself, renounce any right to act, to live and love, or. or "you have to decide." Decide to break through the barriers, to become a “millionaire9raquo; and, having done one evil, then arrange a hundred human well-being.

Raskolnikov himself does not need money. Porfiry Petrovich hardly spoke of the love of comfort, having it in mind; Raskolnikov was able to give the last little thing to another without thinking about himself. But you still need money to help others.

So one day Raskolnikov's thought stops at the existence of an old usurer, and gradually the concrete embodiment of his entire theory is concentrated around this existence. The idea was unusually simple, and to Raskolnikov's surprise, it occurred to others as well. It was as if the suggestion of a hypnotist, like the voice of "predestination"9raquo;, knocked in his mind the words from a conversation he heard by chance: "Kill her and take her money, so that with their help you can later devote yourself to the service of all mankind and the common cause. »

And this conversation, and some other random coincidences of circumstances, push Raskolnikov to kill the old pawnbroker.

What is wrong with Rodion Raskolnikov?

In the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment" reflected the contradictions of reality and social thought of the "twilight" era of the 60s of the XIX century. The writer saw how the post-reform breakdown of social relations gradually led to a deep crisis of social ideals, unsteadiness moral life Russia.

“Some kind of trichinas appeared, microscopic creatures that inhabited the bodies of people,” Dostoevsky noted in his novel, referring to the ideas that occupied the minds of different essence and orientation. younger generation torn off from the norms of universal human and Christian morality, excommunicated from cultural traditions carefully preserved by previous generations. But these ideas, due to the writer's special attitude to the nature of human existence, his recognition of the presence of otherworldly forces in real life, appear before the reader of Crime and Punishment as "spirits endowed with mind and will."

From these positions, Dostoevsky evaluates the ideas and actions of the main character of his novel, Rodion Raskolnikov, portraying him as a person “infected” with an idea, a victim of the forces of evil that are really present in everyday life.

So, what are the main provisions of the theory of this hero? What is Raskolnikov's mistake?

Raskolnikov is trying to prove the idea of \u200b\u200bthe justice of "blood according to conscience." To do this, he divides all people into two categories: “into the lowest (ordinary) ..., into the material that serves only for the birth of their own kind, and actually into people, that is, those who have the gift or talent to say a new word in their midst.”

Further, Dostoevsky's hero proves the right of these "real" people to commit crime in the name of a noble goal, believing that for the happiness of the majority, a minority can be sacrificed. For Raskolnikov, this is "simple arithmetic." He believes that the "superman" is allowed to "step over the blood" in the name of the well-being of all mankind - such a crime is relatively and justified by a "high" goal. This goal is to "drive" ignorant humanity, that is, according to Raskolnikov, people of the "second category", into " crystal palace» well-being, universal prosperity, create a kingdom of justice on earth.

Of course, “it does not at all follow that Newton had the right to kill anyone he wants ... or steal every day in the market,” Raskolnikov admits. However, this is only the outer side of the problem.

Already these statements allow us to conclude that the theory of the hero of the novel is fallacious. On the one hand, Raskolnikov correctly noticed some common features of human characters - this is confirmed by the facts of History.

Another thing is that such a formulation of the question contradicts the laws of universal morality and Christian ethics, which proclaims all people equally equal before God. Raskolnikov forgets that the personality of any person is priceless and inviolable. The hero does not understand that by killing the old pawnbroker as the personification of earthly evil (in his subjective opinion), he destroys the person in himself, commits a crime against himself.

Thus, Raskolnikov's theory is anti-human in its essence, since it freely allows to commit murders, to create lawlessness under the guise of an abstract "noble goal". This is one of the mistakes of Dostoevsky's hero and, at the same time, his tragedy. The writer sees the reason for his delusion, first of all, in unbelief, separation from cultural traditions, loss of love for Man.

Analyzing Raskolnikov's arguments in defense of his theory, we can conclude that its real meaning is not to justify the human right to do good with the help of evil, but to recognize the existence of a "superman" that rises above "ordinary" morality. After all, the hero thinks not so much about the possibility of murder as such, but about relativity moral laws and deification of the human person.

Here lies the second, no less erroneous and tragic, delusion of Raskolnikov: he does not take into account the fact that an “ordinary”, “ordinary”, according to his standards, a person is not able to become a “superman”, to replace God. That is why, dreaming of standing out from the general human mass, hoping to become a "great genius, the consummator of mankind," Dostoevsky's character became an ordinary criminal, a murderer.

Raskolnikov thought that the “kingdom of reason and light” would come for him, but the “darkness” of mortal sin, “eternity on a yard of space” came. The hero realized that he was simply not capable of becoming Napoleon.

Thus, Rodion Raskolnikov becomes a victim of his own theory, the mistake of the "ranks", into which he himself divided all people. By his tragic example, he proved the impossibility of turning a “second-class person” into a “master who has to say a new word” at the expense of human sacrifice.

The idea of allowing “blood according to conscience”, permissiveness, and the denial of ethical principles either leads to the destruction of the human personality, as happened with Raskolnikov, or gives rise to monsters like Svidrigailov. In the clash of Raskolnikov's ideas with reality, the inconsistency, fallacy and obvious depravity of his theory is exposed, which is the essence of the conflict in Dostoevsky's novel.

Attention, only TODAY!