Good video; it's a great read. Although, Tolstoy in this work and other readings doesn't go so far as to say that Christianity is correct or that the "scriptures are sound". He sees crucial points of the theology of that faith (ie. the resurrection, miracles, a proper individual afterlife) as impossible things or contradictions he cannot bring himself to believe, and he's frustrated by the fact that they're so intertwined with the routines and services associated with "church". The thing he cites that makes him stop going to church isn't the behavior of those around him; it's that he takes communion and doesn't believe in what his leaders are speaking of (specifically in the Catholic Eucharist). And when he speaks to people about it, he realizes that many of them A. have never doubt that stuff from the get-go or B. are mostly concerned with those kinds of beliefs with the intent to be "right" against the other. He says specific theology often destroys the very faith it's being used to promote/encourage. I see that as a pretty different view entirely from seeing Christianity as sound even if he says he agrees with core beliefs of faith in the ways they relate to Christianity and personal relationships with God.
I love his works but i found this one very frustrating. Too much drama while it being obvious that natassyna and agalya deserved no minute of the prince’s time. 615 pages when that is obvious off the rip was extremely tedious and frustrating by page 300.
I came to the same questions and conclusions when I started reading more. I think we go through this process mostly because people around us are usually spending their time doing other things and don’t prioritize reading, which makes us question our choice of doing so. Just keep up man! I’m starting a book today: The rise of Theodore Roosevelt. How about you read it too and make a review for us, even a live maybe ? That would be awesome!
Just met you channel on RU-vid and I’m astonished on how many of my next books to read (or recently read) you have a video for. I’m definitely gonna spend a lot of time watching your videos! Thanks for the content!
n the future, as you age, you are gong to see ths book n a whole new light. Your youthful vigor wll submt to the wheels of tme and you wll be surprised at how your percepton has changed.
I’ve read it, not sure you have. You are both taking aspects out of context and deliberately vilifying the ideology. The abolition of privet property is not a call to take your house and car, as you make it out to be. It’s simply a nationalization of property that would otherwise be used for the accruement of capital to the detriment of the needy. A better sentiment to sum it all up would be “from each according to his ability to each according to his need”. All of the things communism “seeks to destroy” have been commodified by the proletariat and removed from their respective meaning, that meaning replaced with the relation to capital. And that revolution we seek would be in the face of a greater threat the continuation of capitalism and the growth of the upper class.
This was the first book I read by Dostoevsky and it shook me in a way no book ever had before. I had read Dickens, I had read Proust, Brontë’s Wuthering Heights and books I thought were fairly deep... they did not compare. This book, especially the ending, introduced me to a writer in a league of his own
:" Just a single man, Fyodor Dostoevsky, is enough to defeat all the creative novelists of the world. If one has to decide on 10 great novels in all the languages of the world, one will have to choose at least 3 novels of Dostoevsky in those 10. Dostoevsky’s insight into human beings and their problems is greater than your so-called psychoanalysts, and there are moments where he reaches the heights of great mystics. His book BROTHERS KARAMAZOV is so great in its insights that no BIBLE or KORAN or GITA comes close. In another masterpiece of Dostoevsky, THE IDIOT, the main character is called ‘idiot’ by the people because they can’t understand his simplicity, his humbleness, his purity, his trust, his love. You can cheat him, you can deceive him, and he will still trust you. He is really one of the most beautiful characters ever created by any novelist. The idiot is a sage. The novel could just as well have been called THE SAGE. Dostoevsky’s idiot is not an idiot; he is one of the sanest men amongst an insane humanity. If you can become the idiot of Fyodor Dostoevsky, it is perfectly beautiful. It is better than being cunning priest or politician. Humbleness has such a blessing. Simplicity has such benediction."
I don’t think you are trying to help people “understand” communism, otherwise you would be neutral, presenting the negatives and positives of the ideology. It’s fine to disagree, or even be against, with ideology, but don’t pretend you are trying to help people understand. You should’ve said something like “three reasons why I don’t like communism” “three reasons why you should hate communism” or something along those click-baity lines. Please do not add more noise to an already deafeningly noisy world.
He’s poignantly summarizing what’s in the book. Those are the facts. That’s how you understand communism. Have you read the communist manifesto? I have.
But he is explaining 3 general outlines of what communism is😂 it sounds like he’s listing terrible things because communism quite literally is terrible😂 that’s what communism is. That should tell you something?
@@Jordan-gf6re Well, the USSR imploded for many factors, but economically, it showed the superiority of a communism over capitalism by elevating Russia to a world superpower position in just a couple of decades. And this phenomenon is still being demonstrated by China. Politically, we can easily do without authoritarian governments, in my humble opinion a participative democracy would be the route to go. But, did this video mentioned that about communism?
This is a pretty good analysis, I think. But if there is one thing I think we can take from reading Dostoevsky is that there are many levels or layers to uncover in his works that render any short analysis, however valid, incomplete. And I think that's one of his most endearing (and important) traits.
Yea.You can’t read and reread Dostoevsky and continue to discover new and deeper “ levels of the soil”. Sorry, I’m just repeating what has already been said.
The superiority complex by which Raskolnikov justifies murder is the exact same outlook elites today hold when they look at the common man. Dostoyevsky really was a prophet.
Your truncation of Nietzsche's "God is dead" quote does him an injustice. And, I sense that you know better. Also, the mission statement of Black Lives Matter is this "Eradicate white supremacy and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on black communities by the state and vigilantes", as BLM chooses to state it. I sense that much of your analysis is correct, but about halfway through you bend the it in the direction of your own agenda. I didn't start listening to your video in order to hear that. I was interested in Dostoevsky and his book.
your take on Prince is utterly wrong. Prince was a noble title in Russia. like Prince Sheremetev or Prince Yusupov and it was how people were addressed so, your take on it makes little sense.
Solzhenitsyn was an Eastern Orthodox Christian. It shows in his illustrious description of what is valuable in life. Parallel to Solomon in Ecclesiastes. Thank God for His Son Jesus Christ for true purpose and salvation through faith in Him.
