Did Dostoevsky truly believe in God, or was he man scared of death that desperately 'wanted' to believe in a God? His final work, the Brothers Karamasov, seems to challenge the existence of God throughout.

File: 15 KB, 340x255, dostoevsky_200612122028290.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 20:47:55 2020 No.16467138 [Reply] [Original]

Did Dostoevsky truly believe in God, or was he man scared of death that desperately 'wanted' to believe in a God? His final work, the Brothers Karamasov, seems to challenge the existence of God throughout.

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 20:54:45 2020 No.16467173
File: 1.87 MB, 500x514, 1597794956390.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>16467138
>Did Dostoevsky truly believe in God
No. Dostoevsky's whole idea is to parody the christian ethos and doctrines in a full spectrum critique of it as an ideology and praxis.

Dostoevsky clearly wasn't an actual christian. He was far too intelligent and learnèd for that. it's truly a testament to the retardation of christcucks that they can't realize Dostoevsky was only ever mocking them

He literally makes all of his intelligent characters Nihilist academics who despise christianity and all of the christians are portrayed as the village fools or social and intellectual cowards. Dostoevsky saw christianity as something fit for the peasants and his entire corpus is a dedicated effort to lampooning the religion via sarcastic fulfillment of its asinine tropes.

Dostoevsky qas laughing at all the christcucks throughout his entire life. He lived in outright defiance of all christian doctrines. Dostoevsky wasted fortunes on prostitutes who he played sadist on. he had multiple affairs. he drank and gambled himself to ruin. But it was all okay because he could just shit out another parody of christucks and he'd be heralded as a heavyweight of apologetics.

Seriously I don't understand where this whole "Dostoevsky was a christian" meme came from. a critical review of his life and works immediately reveals that he was one of the most profound atheists who ever lived.

Multiple atheist professors who I've known have read him and concur

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 20:57:41 2020 No.16467189 >>16467138 How does TBK challenge God? At most, I just felt it was a very long dialogue between horrible people.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 20:59:38 2020 No.16467196 >>16467173 Do you happen to think that in order to be Christian one must follow the doctrine? This has never been the case.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:00:25 2020 No.16467205 >>16467173 Then what was Demons about?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:03:55 2020 No.16467223 >>16467173 Holy moley the seethe in this post is off the charts.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:08:06 2020 No.16467248 >>16467173 >>16467138 you guys are fucking retarded the nihilists are literally there to show the stupidity of nihilism man, imagine him watching teenage nietzche fags misunderstanding his obviously-not-nihilist books in 2020

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:08:40 2020 No.16467251

>>16467173
Seethe atheist
>>16467138
"I am a child of unbelief and doubt up to this moment, and I am certain I shall remain so to the grave"

One does not need to be totally unquestioning to be pious. In fact piety is often accompanied by deep scrutinization, as evidenced by the very existence of Talmud.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:11:38 2020 No.16467271 >>16467173 Interesting theory

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:13:19 2020 No.16467283

>>16467138
just the typical "I want to believe in God (which they mean the picture of perfection, beauty and justice who will correct the wrongs of this world now or in the afterlife) so badly but I am always full of doubt" that many writers suffered from at some point (Tolstoy, Wilde, Joyce etc.) It is genuine and they challenge the existence of God in a dark night of the soul kind of tsundere way (he's not actually real is he? Of course he is I love Him so much! But he isn't actually real...)

all in all, this derives from having too much empathy and being exposed to reality too much and so the only potential cure is a being who may or may not exist because things that do exist can't fix the world

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:13:43 2020 No.16467287
File: 376 KB, 1600x1509, 1571869343168.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>16467173
9/10 bait
>>16467138
Track the character of Alyosha - following him, could you really doubt Dostoevsky's sincere belief? His character's depth of belief, so well put and described, and the complete innocence of his actions witness so well against those of his brothers, his father, and both the girls who have crushes on him (can't remember their names). So what if Dostoevsky is able to name some the arguments and movements against Christianity convincingly - doesn't that just mean that he has examined his faith? Why does it need to mean that he was a crypto-atheist, or that he had soul-crushing, constant doubts?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:14:02 2020 No.16467291 File: 31 KB, 850x400, c0b41d304bf3dc972fcf72b08f1b2f6d.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16467173 I still think this quote is right though.

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:15:58 2020 No.16467305
File: 193 KB, 741x763, 1601156579664.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>16467173
Interesting and original take, but obviously bullshit nonetheless.

Read his dialogue with the whore in notes from underground for example, he obviously mentions god there unironically

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:17:04 2020 No.16467315 >>16467291 Weak quote af, unless seen as an archetype

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:17:42 2020 No.16467319 >>16467173 >Multiple atheist professors who I've known have read him and concur Lmfao @ your life

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:20:24 2020 No.16467337 >>16467315 It's impossible to refute. Without God there is no objective morality.

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:23:22 2020 No.16467350
File: 134 KB, 661x441, 1600612704153.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>16467337
God is unfalsifiable, thus not within the scientific realm, thus morality derived from god is not objective.

Morality based on evolution could easily be objective, might is right. Just hard to interpret in daily life, does not mean it is less objective.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:31:12 2020 No.16467385 >>16467350 Nah I think God can be proven with a variety of different arguments. You're just exhibiting a prime example of Scientism.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:32:25 2020 No.16467397 >ANY AUTHOR I LIKE IS ATHEIST didnt this meme die in the 60s

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:34:17 2020 No.16467412 >>16467173 >anigay no thanks subhuman

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:35:15 2020 No.16467417 >>16467173 she cute cringe post

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:44:45 2020 No.16467459 >>16467173 lol this poster resents christianity because it doesn’t want him to be a tranny

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:51:47 2020 No.16467486 File: 2.27 MB, 800x1199, 1600988527631.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16467385 OK, you gonna pull out the five shittuments from Thomas Akuinaz? You're just wrong.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 21:59:49 2020 No.16467520 File: 22 KB, 220x310, 220px-Bertrand_Russell_cropped.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16467486 You gonna use this guy to say he's wrong? Russel didn't even understand a basic understanding of the word motus in latin.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:00:57 2020 No.16467523 >>16467291 If there is a God, everything is still permitted.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:04:00 2020 No.16467532 >>16467523 You know what he means. Stop playing semantics.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:06:45 2020 No.16467545 >>16467523 Alright lad I'll give you that but have you ever tried to fly? Maybe just stop breathing?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:09:39 2020 No.16467560 >>16467532 Is it a bad translation? What does he mean? >>16467545 No, why? Are attempting these not permitted?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:10:59 2020 No.16467567 >>16467173 good, well-reasoned take, but completely wrong

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:12:26 2020 No.16467575 >>16467560 >What does he mean? That morals don't exist without God

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:17:51 2020 No.16467606 >>16467575 I don't understand. Why would the existence of morality depend on God but not normativity? This argument just fails like logical positivism.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:25:17 2020 No.16467640 >>16467606 Because god is pure existence and pure actuality meaning he is unable to change, meaning he is the foundational first principle we can judge everything on. We cannot base morality off of evolution because it changes.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:30:26 2020 No.16467665 >>16467640 You didn't address anything, you just argued some r/atheisms strawman. If morality is dependent on God, why isn't truth dependent on God?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:31:31 2020 No.16467674 >>16467560 Give it a shot

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:49:27 2020 No.16467771 >>16467665 Why wouldn't truth be dependent on God? He would be the reason why everything exists.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 22:53:04 2020 No.16467784 >>16467640 You don't understand morality or evolution... or God

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 23:04:06 2020 No.16467852 >>16467771 I don't know, I was asking you because if truth is dependent on God then Dostoevsky's proposition is meaningless - or at least redundant.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 23:09:49 2020 No.16467882 >>16467852 Everything you say is vague and incoherent. I don't even know what you're talking about. How does truth being dependent make Dosto's quote redundant? Stop baiting.

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 23:17:22 2020 No.16467923

>>16467882
Truth is dependent on God, along with morality. If God doesn't exist neither does truth or morality. How can we evaluate that statement without an infinite regression or absurdity?

>God doesn't exist
>Truth doesn't exist
>The above proposition cannot be true
>The above proposition cannot be true
>The above proposition cannot be true
>...

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 28 23:46:13 2020 No.16468094 >>16467923 I think without a first principle, or necessary being, (God), we would be forced to submit by faith to various axioms.

Anonymous Mon Sep 28 23:57:53 2020 No.16468157

>>16468094
This doesn't matter. Dostoevsky's proposition would still say those axioms can't be true. But if truth doesn't exist we can't have propositions about truth, like the previous one.
>Or the proposition above
>Or the proposition above
>Or the proposition above
>...
It is like trivialism or absolute skepticism: there is no point where one can begin at. The position is an impenetrable loop that you can't exit out of but can't enter into.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 00:05:30 2020 No.16468201 >>16467350 lol what a retard you are, assigning random principles as being "moral" based on "evolution" is a purely subjective take on what morality is, there isnt anything objective about it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 00:08:03 2020 No.16468218 >>16467173 >I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Dostoyevsky's genius unfolds itself on their book pages

Anonymous Tue Sep 29 00:09:18 2020 No.16468226

>>16468157
>Dostoevsky's proposition would still say those axioms can't be true
Except I believe God does exist. But if he didn't then I would say nothing can be said to be true, not even this statement (think pyrrhonism). And like I said before, axioms on faith would have to be made to fulfill that. I think we are going in circles here.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 00:25:46 2020 No.16468323 >>16468226 Then all he is saying is >There must be a God, because this proposition exists Meaningless or redundant.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 01:01:18 2020 No.16468478 >>16467248 Wowee anon I sure learned that nihilism was bad in crime and punishment where he doesn't repent and believe in redemption even at the end

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 01:20:42 2020 No.16468578 >>16467138 Jews and Spiritual Semites cannot know God. Christians, Muslims, and Jews all worship the God of Death.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 01:37:19 2020 No.16468633 >>16468578 What a stupid poem.

Anonymous Tue Sep 29 02:39:49 2020 No.16468781

>>16467138
He was, just not in the overinfantilized Protestant sense of the word. That's why Dostoevsky triggers Protestants so much, because he doesn't outright tells you what he actually believes, he's not afraid of criticizing Christianity, expressing doubt, and exploring experimental thoughts that are often consider taboo or obscure in most theological circles. He was in fact a self proclaimed Christian Orthodox in his mid to later years, but an existential writer nonetheless, therefore he was more focused on unraveling the inner darkest realities of humanity; and probably didn't live a very Christian live either, because of his addiction to gambling and so on.

Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:10:04 2020 No.16468868
File: 68 KB, 850x400, inb4 some midwit calls this quote satire.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>16467173
>He literally makes all of his intelligent characters Nihilist academics who despise christianity
This is the most infantile interpretation of Dostoevsky's characterization I have ever witnessed on this entire fucking board, to even THINK these characters are meant to be positive representations of that very archetype. Are you actually 16 years old? Go do your fucking homework kid.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:19:21 2020 No.16468901 >>16468478 No he just lived in misery over the fact trying to convince himself he was in the right. Really strong case for nihilism right there.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:21:44 2020 No.16468910 >>16468478 No he just lived in misery as he tries to convince his ego he was in the right, that his killing actually had some greater utilitarian purpose. Really strong case for nihilism right there.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:24:26 2020 No.16468919 >>16467173 Pretty good bait, but that last line ruins it. Sorry.

Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:26:01 2020 No.16468923

>>16467350
>God is unfalsifiable, thus not within the scientific realm, thus morality derived from god is not objective.
Dostoevsky's quote is attributed to the notion that morality only has meaning if a good God exists, the idea that God may not exist doesn't refute this concept, it simply means that an absence of God is thusly an absence of morality. Try to form a coherent line of thought for once in your life.
>Morality based on evolution could easily be objective, might is right. Just hard to interpret in daily life, does not mean it is less objective.
I have no idea what you mean by this.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:29:09 2020 No.16468932 >>16467173 You are the dumbest motherfucker I have ever seen. Read “The Peasant Marey” and Joseph Frank. Holy fuck, what a waste Dosto is on you.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:30:36 2020 No.16468938 >>16467173 If Dostoevsky was still alive and read this he'd be utterly furious.

Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:42:51 2020 No.16468977

>>16467337
It's actually the reverse. With "God's" permission, any act becomes permissible. The assumption is that the God that exists mandates a morality YOU agree with and would accept as objective. Since there is no way of securing the objectivity of a moral code, it comes down to faith, which is a subjective belief. It's reasoning like this that is below even midwit.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:45:03 2020 No.16468983 >>16468868 >saying the quiet part out loud So we can all agree Christianity is purely a cope and a comforting lie, yes?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:49:42 2020 No.16468997 >>16467350 >God is a spook! >So My Special Morality based on another spook...

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 03:53:49 2020 No.16469010 >>16467350 Might is right actually isn't the mightiest though, since cooperation leads to synergy which has allowed our species to conquer the globe. Reciprocation is actually king, and likely the closest we can get to an objective moral good

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 04:16:51 2020 No.16469064 What was the deal with Lise?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 04:25:25 2020 No.16469086 >>16467291 Under the excuse of God everything is permitted too

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 04:48:26 2020 No.16469152 File: 314 KB, 746x941, my8h3i80Fgo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16469064 BPD

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 04:55:52 2020 No.16469177 >>16469086 people with a conscience shy away from doing harm, those without a conscience freely do harm, but to make a person with a conscience do harm, it takes religion

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 05:05:20 2020 No.16469198 >>16469177 It takes mob and group think. This is not special to religion.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 05:06:12 2020 No.16469200 >>16469086 go to bed Zizek

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 05:06:31 2020 No.16469201 >>16468983 Everything is a cope retard. Nihilism is a cope.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 05:09:32 2020 No.16469210 >>16467173 >anime tranny is retarded imagine my shock

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 07:11:21 2020 No.16469594 File: 215 KB, 479x446, zk6FdHn_d.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16467173 Based and enlightened. Religion is for slaves. Tradcucks seethe.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 29 08:28:18 2020 No.16469872 >>16467196 What a useless religion

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature