1. For the next class we will be focusing on Dostoevsky's treatment of women, particularly Sonya & Dounia. Come prepared with specific passages marked that shed light on these women.
2. Go to Part Three, Chapter One, about six pages in (202 in Peavear/Volkonsky) and find the paragraph that begins, "What do you think?" Razumikhin shouted, raising his voice even more. "You think it's because they are lying?" Read from the line, "I like it when people lie!" through about a page and a half, ending with "Pyotr Petrovich . . . is not on a noble path."
Deceit abounds in C & P, and Rodya seems to have more than a little Hamlet in him. What do you make of this dialogue with Razumikhin? How does lying lead to truth in this novel? Cite specific passages/details to support your ideas.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
30 comments:
Though in an absurdly drunk state of mind, Razumikhin makes some very philosphical statements that I feel personify this book. He tries to define what separates man from simple animal. (The above quote is italicized in my book. This surely shows the great importance to the reader, and Raskolnikov, that this moment is.)
Razumikhin says to "talk nonsense, but talk your own nonsense...to go wrong in one's own way is better than to go right in someone else's. In the first case you are a man, in the second you're no better than a bird." Personally, I think Razumikhin sums up pretty well the defining characteristics of humans. We lie, we devieve, and we just flat out screw up. Razumikhin is encouraging men to think their own thoughts rather than accept the thoughts of others.
"In science, development... everything, we are are still in the preparatory class at school. We prefer to live on other people's ideas, it is what we are used to!" What I make out of this very point is the fact that we as humans do not form our own thoughts often enough. Though drunk, Razumikhin brings up a very key point of argument.
The main instance that brings deceit into my mind is the case of the murder of the pawnbroker and her sister. Raskolnikov is the murderer, and Porfiry knows it. Yet for some reason when Nikolay confessed to the crimes (a clear lie in this case) Porfiry willingly put him under arrest.
Porfiry makes a similar point to Razumikhin in saying that "a hundred suspicions don't make a proof, but that's only from the rational point of view -- you can't help being partial after all a lawyer is human". While suspicions are merely spoken or thought "nonsense", it is only human to allow the suspicions to bias your opinion. Despite Porfiry knowing the truth about the murders, Raskolnikov persists in his denial of the crime.
It is only the last page of part 6 when from within the midst of lies and deceit, truth comes forth. After telling mother, sister, and lover of his heinous crimes, Raskolnikov makes the truth known to the persistent Porfiry.
While Raskolnikov was the only one knew he was the murderer, he had no guilt or reason to confess. However, once it was made known to Sonya he had to go through with his confession. It "was [the] look of poignant agony, of despair, in her face" that put the "meaningless smile" on Raskolnikov's face and forced him back up to the stairs to the police office.
The grief and guilt in Raskolnikov's confession is apparent due to his "incoherent" speech. He mustered up the heart and let it out. "It was I killed the old pawnbroker woman and her sister Lizaveta with an axe and robbed them." Petrovitch's open mouth prompted a repeated confession. Even though lies were widespread, eventually truth broke through.
I think this is the first time I have posted first...
Razumikhin favorite theories all seem to center around the same subject: lies versus truth. When he discusses lying he seems to come off very hypocritical, contridicting this earlier statement about the search for truth. But, he argues that it is through lying that truths are revealed and brought into the light. He says: "Lying is what makes me a man." And based on his past as a genuine and kind individual, we know that he is being downright honest. When he does tell a little lie, however, it always seems to be with the person's best interest at heart. If he does lie it is always small and never meant to do harm, in fact, it is meant to do quite the opposite. "Lying in one's own way is almost better than telling the truth in someone else's way." Razumikhin seems to be warning against blind faith. He knows very well that people often times accept whatever they are being told and never stop for a minute to think for themselve and wonder what they are being told is really the truth.
I wonder how much of Razumikhin's fit of passion was fueled mostly by his intoxication and maybe even partically related to his overwhelming feelings for Dunya. Together the part seems to magnify everything tenfold and thus injects much deeper meansing into every word he is saying. Maybe it is similar to how some people claim "a drunk mind speaks a sober heart."
I also stumbled across this quote for the previous part (which is part II, chapter IV). "What's the most offensive is not their lying-one can always forgive lying-lying is a delightful thin, for it leads to truth-what is offensive is that they lie and worship their own lying..." says Razumihin.
This was a very interesting passage. On the first read through, I didn't quite grasp it's significance, but understand it now.
As Jonathan said, Razumikhin seems to be in a very drunk state during this dialogue. Nevertheless, his insight into human thinking is profound. One example was when he said, "to go wrong in one's way is better than to go right in someone else's." In this statement, Razumikhin is showcasing one of the important truths: the ability to think for oneself. I believe this exmaple, along with the example Razumikhin gives on the nature of science, embodies the general feel of this dialogue.
Like Jonathan, I could only think of deceit in the example of Raskolnikov's grave murder. While Porfiry knows the truth, he does not pursue convicting Raskolnikov immedicately. In fact, Porfiry allows Nikolay to confess (even though this doesn't really make sense). This lie, compounded over the course of the novel and coupled with Raskolnikov's brewing guilt, eventually brings out the truth, as Raskolnikov turns himself in to Porfiry.
One other part in the novel that I found interesting was in Part II, Chapter 4, paragraph 44. In this part, Razumikhin states, "'What’s the most offensive is not their lying—one can always forgive lying—lying is a delightful thing, for it leads to truth—what is offensive is that they lie and worship their own lying.'" In this, Razumikhin seems to be sharing his thoughts on the process of lying, and what its use is in the long run. However, he also shares the problems with it, not citing guilt or moral degeneration, but rather that people "worship their own lying."
"Lying is man's only privilege over all other organisms." The truth about lying from Razumikhin's rant about the theory of lying. It made me wonder how lying was invented. Why we do it is obvious enough, to avoid punishment. "We like getting by on other people's reason." We like to have others think for us. Lying leads to the truth because there were fourteen lies before the truth was exposed. As Razumikhin said "not one truth has ever been reached without first lying fourteen times..." which I'm sure after reading this, everyone searched their memories for this phenomenon happening in their own lives.
This is an incredibly ironic passage, because right after explaining that he believes lies and deceit are a good thing, Razumikhin gets on his knees are pours out his soul. While he claims to be discussing lies, I believe his true topic is the personal philosophies held by many other characters, but scorned by Razumikhin. We talked last class about how Razumikhiin rejects the idealist attitudes of many of his fellow characters; this is a perfect example.
When he says "We like getting by on other people's reason" I believe he is referring to his frustration with Raskolnikov and other's inability to create their own ideas, and instead take part in the philosophical revolutions of the present day. Additionally, Razumikhin's words foreshadow Raskolnikov's moral unwinding. He must lie multiple times before he is able to tell the truth about his murder. He watches other men suffer for his crime before he finally owns up to his work. This idea of deception versus truth is a theme running throughout the book. As a final note, I also think it's interesting that in a way Razumikhin is lying to the women in this scene, because although he seems to just be a nice person wanting to care for his "family", he is really in love with Dunya and will do anything to win her affections.
Razumikhin is REASON, personified.
Reason in this passage speaks from his experience in Life, that is, human history. Reason has been, throughout history, humankind's intelligence; Reason has given man dominion over the Earth. He says, "Lying is man's only privilege over all other organisms"
Throughout history, though, humanity's Reason has evolved, and evolution is only possible, in a sense, through making mistakes.
Aeschylus, perhaps mankind's first philosopher and writer of human tragedies in ancient Greece writes in his "Agamemnon":
"Zeus has led us on to know, the Helmsman lays it down as law that we must suffer, suffer into truth. We cannot sleep, and drop at the heart the pain of pain remembered comes again, and we resist, but ripeness comes as well. From the gods enthroned on the awesome rowing-bench there comes a violent love...Justice turns the balance scales, sees that we suffer and we suffer and we learn."
Reason, or Razumikhin, echoes this Classical interpretation of life itself.
By lying, one is at least attempting to act upon what one believes the purpose of life to be. Instead of being told what to do. "Not one truth has ever been reached without first lying fourteen times or so, maybe a hundred and fourteen."
"The truth won't go way, but life can be nailed shut". This passage is echoed by Jesus, Martin Luther, Joseph Smith, Mahatma Gandhi, Thomas Jefferson and all other challengers of authority. Life CAN most definitely be nailed shut by Absolute Truths. Truths that are accepted without their validity tested can limit man's understanding, his very existence and the people who recognize the lies so as to point them out to their fellow man are technically lying, in regard to the socially accepted Absolute Truths, when they say "All men are created equal"; while slave owners refuse to believe it because of their Absolutisms.
Raskolnikov acts on his Absolute Truths, his Absolute Rationalist theory that, as we see through his obviously lucky breaks, is indeed a lie. He deceives his family, Reason(Razumikhin), and all St. Petersburg. However, Sonya helps him realize the lie he is living. And, through this lie, the exceptionally bright man, even loving man, suffers into realizing a new way to live. The epilogue reveals the truth that Raskolnikov and Sofya are forced to suffer through and shines brighter than the sun:
"Seven years, only seven years? At the beginning of their happiness there were moments when they were both willing to look at those seven years as if they were seven days... He did not even know that a new life would not be given him for nothing, that it still had to be dearly bought, to be paid for with a great future deed..."
Although Razumikhin is drunk his mind and his words is very clear and reasonable. The words “if you keep talking big nonsense, you will get to sense,” is very much like the words he said early in part two, “there’s a kind of nonsense that leads to sense.” When the speaker of such “nonsense” knows that he is talking nonsense that he will also know that there is a “sense” somewhere waiting to be discovered. But, like Razumikhin said once we start “talking sense in somebody else’s” we start to believe in this “sense” that is already there, even if it might just be nonsense. This behavior is very much like what Razumikhin said about Koch and Pestriakov in part two, “No, what’s shameful is this. They talk nonsense and worship their own nonsense.” He is angered at Koch and Pestriakov since they have come to believe their lies and actually truth. Throughout the book Raskolnikov lies about the case, but deep down inside he knows that he is the true murder. This belief in the truth may be what caused him to confess. If Raskolnikov fully convinced himself of his theory and if he too “worship [his] own nonsense” then he might not have confessed.
Razumikhin ironically philosophizes about people and their ideals. Readers view Razumikhin as a genuinely kind person who cares about people, yet his theoretical statements seem almost selfish. He notices that people are saturated in others' ideas and looks down upon it, urging people to be themselves and create their own ideas, lying along the way, if for their own good. I understand how this is reasonable in ways, but it could also be unreasonable, Erik, in the eyes of every other person in society: to do what one believes they should do and believe is the reasonable choice, even if that includes lying. Then where is reason placed?
I agree with James that Razumikhin's speech of his frustration about truth versus lies foreshadows Raskolnikov's admittance of his crimes.
This passage was very interesting. A side of Razumikhin that's not presented very much. However, it's critical to the story and conveys a central message of deceit vs truth. Razumikhin claims that he is simply frustrated with how people simply become enthralled with the philosophical ideals of the era. He says "we like getting by on other people's reason-- we've acquired a taste for it!" REASON (Razumikhin) itself is stating a very noble truth that becomes a central topic within the novel--people lie, but lying eventually leads to truth. He later says, "in the end we'll lie our way to the truth, because we're on a noble path, while Pyotr Petrovich... is not on a noble path." Pyotr Petrovich is not on a noble path, because he is not honest with those around him, and not honest with himself. While people such as Razumikhin may not be wealthy, they are at least honest with themselves, and eventually they will be on the "noble path."
I think it’s interesting that Razumikhin believes that “lying is man’s only privilege over all other organisms.” Over everything else that we as human’s possess over animals, he asserts that his ability to lie is “what makes him a man.” The idea of deceit and lying permeates the novel and is, of course, seen quite clearly surrounding--suffocating--Rodya. Just as Razumikhin says in his state of absolute drunkenness, a “truth is not reached without lying fourteen times or so.” [I wonder how many times Rodya lies in the novel before he confesses?] Ultimately, he is saying that truths are always surrounded and tainted by lies. We see this with Rodya; he tries to uphold and protect the lies regarding the crime committed, but his use of deceit essentially fails, when he finally confesses. But, Porfiy wasn’t the one who waded through his lies. Rodya was the one that ultimately confessed--first to Sonya, on his own free-will, then later to the Law, the very force he felt he was superior to or greater than.
I also have to agree with the statement that has been previously mentioned, regarding people’s inability to formulate their own ideas, reasons, theories, etc.
“Lying in one’s own way is almost better than telling the truth in someone else’s way…” For if you resort to another’s idea--a truth for them--you are nothing more than a “a bird,” an animal. You have to stay true to one’s own personal beliefs.
Erik--You’re like a master at finding outside literary sources that relate to our prompts.
"Pyotr Petrovich is not on a noble path" because he seeks a wife out of poverty so he can be her Saviour, and also because he will never admit to anyone that his theory of "Economic Truth"(pg.149 P+V) is an utter lie. Reason has no faith in the Capitalist's world.
In my book the same passage reads "you never reach any truth without making fourteen mistakes and very likely a hundred and fourteen." Though this translation is a bit different, I think it also adds an interesting point to the discussion of the novel. It does so in that in a way it justifies Raskolnikov's crime. The murder was the cause of many more mistakes, of many more lies and of much more suffering, but in the end it brings Raskolnikov to a greater resolution. Through all his pain and misery, it allows Raskolnikov to rid himself of the obsessive emotionally detached life he lead.
In this section Razumihin says that "To go wrong in one's own way is better than to go right in someone else's". I think this is because the our path is instantly created for us based on our own qualities. This is more so if our path has been set because of our negative qualities. The ultimate goal of this path is one of change, even if the path is only full of misery and suffering. To take someone else's path, even if it is happier and less miserable, would not lead to any sort of personal growth or developement.
Addressing the theme that was originally proposed in this prompt, lying does lead to truth in the novel. In fact, the power of lies is the driving force in Porfiry Petrovich's psychological games with Raskolnikov. He is already suspicious when he meets Raskolnikov that he is the murderer, and he hold that in his mind through their many interviews when Raskolnikov lies to him. The strategy is rooted in the force of conscience. Each lie weighs down on the liar, and the cumulative weight is what eventually leads the liar to truth.
The quote that stood out to me the most in the passage was "You never reach any truth without making fourteen mistakes and very likely a hundred and fourteen. And a fine thing, too, in its way; but we can't even make mistakes on our own account." I think Razumihin is saying that to understand truth and be truthful, we have to accept our faults, but many of us are blind by our imperfections. Our lies try to conceal our "mistakes" and deceive others. However, Razumihin also says "talk your own nonsense," which was interesting because as long as its your own knowledge then lying can lead you to define your own ideals/morals.
Also, Razumihin's passion wasn't just fueled by his alcohol consumption, but more for the unstable relationships he has. He is uncertain who he can trust and this frustrates him because he craves for someone who he can relay on. This also relates to his frustration with his internal battle with Dunya and his own family. It fuels his obligation with the suffering of his family or choosing to mend his own heart.
Throughout Razumikhin's excessive rambling to Dounia and Pulkheria he seemed to be saying that people who talked of false nonsense seem to end up portraying some kind of truth with their words. When people deny or make stories that contradict the actions or decisions that they have made maybe they are listening to their own lies and realizing what or who they want to be in life. That was what Rodya seemed to be doing throughout this book, he would constantly deny that he killed anyone, all the while contemplating his extreme doubt. At the end of the novel, he seemed to have talked so much nonsense about what he had done, that those lies began to eat away at him and force him to tell the truth himself. Yet i'm not sure whether or not it was necessarily his guilt from the lies that he told, or the guilt because he was not the person that others like Sonya wanted him to be and saw him as.
The fact that Razumikhin is able to share insightful thoughts while intoxicated seems to embrace the idea that he is the voice of reason in this novel. I thought that Juan analyzed this passage very well. Razumikhin is not only criticizing people for being unoriginal, but also for trying to take the easy way out by leeching onto someone else and accepting their every thought and word. In my version Razumikhin says, "If you're going to give me big nonsense, better make it your own big nonsense, and I'll kiss you for it. Talk nonsense in your own way. That's almost better than talking sense in somebody else's. In the first case you're a man, in the second just a parrot!"
This rant shows how strongly he feels about creating your own ideals and searching for answers instead of just taking what is convenient. I like what Erik said: "Truths that are accepted without their validity tested can limit man's understanding"
Later on he says, "You see ladies... the guys over at my place are all drunk, but they're all honest, and though we all talk nonsense- for I must tell you, I talk nonsense too- still, in the long run, we will go on talking nonsense until we climb to something. Maybe to the truth, because we're on the right road..." Though he calls it "nonsense," he still considers it to be significant and seems to have much more hope in searching (aimlessly? possibly) than any other way of life. He values development and reason, not a senseless conclusion.
I also agreed with everyone who posted before me who said that all of the lying eventually forced the truth out of Rodya.
Something that stood out to me in this passage is "talking nonsense is man's only privilege that distinguishes him from all other organisms." This phrase/statement explains how he feels about lying and telling the truth. He validates and supports his reasoning that lying is okay. All humans lie and they are humans BECAUSE they lie (or they lie because they're human?) I also thought it was interesting that the word he used was "privilege" --like lying is a good thing. We should be happy to have the ability to be able to lie.
The other quote I thought was interesting was "nobody ever got to a single truth without talking nonsense fourteen times first." He mumbles about lying and then goes on to talking about telling the truth. This passage is very ironic. And I think that he's talking about discovery. Sometimes you will try and try and you will have faults and faults--but eventually you'll get a good result.
I found this passage interesting because it's important to the story line and discusses the arguement of lying verses truth. Also, I agree with Jonathan and Niloy about how Razumikhin seems like he's drunk when he talks. Maybe he was so dunk that he was actually saying wise things. When Razumikhin says, "to go wrong in one's way is better than to go right in someone else's." he is talking about independent thoughts and actions and how conformity is wrong. This idea is a universal truth that parents and teachers stress on children from birth.
Also, Razumikhin says "“if you keep talking big nonsense, you will get to sense,”. at first I thought that this didn't make any sense and that it was just a drunk man jabbering about, but after I thought about it, it made a lot more sense. To me, it says that if you keep trying at something, then you'll eventually succeed. Just like Thomas Edison and the lightbulb. Everyone told him that he was wasting his time, so this experiments were nonsense but his persistence lead to the invention of the light bulb which would be like the sense.
Another prominent example of lying leading to the truth is Nikolay's false confession. Nikolay bursts into Raskolnikov and Porfiry Petrovich's private chat and shouts, "I am guilty! Mine is the sin! I am the murderer" (4.VI.G)
As anyone who has read the story knows, he's lying. Porfiry Petrovich also knows he's lying; "He [Nikolay] is innocent and responsive to influence." (6.II.G) But this false confessions turns Nikolay into a semi-important character, and as a result, we learn that he actually confessed because he wanted to suffer. We learn that Nikolay "is innocent and responsive to influence. He has a heart, and is a fantastic fellow. He sings and dances, he tells stories." We also learn that Nikolay was "always reading his Bible on the stove at night and he read himself crazy" and "that one day, apropos of nothing, he seized a brick and flung it at the governor... Well, we know what happens to a prisoner who assaults an officer with a weapon. So ‘he took his suffering.’" (6.II.G) For much the same reason, he confessed.
Nikolay's lies eventually led to the revelation of his origins and personality.
Lies have their ways of finding us in the end and in fact it's what makes us human. As Razumikhin stated, "I am a man because I err". From how I'm interpreting this passage, the only way to find the truth is through lying. I like what Erik said about Razumikhin is reason. I think in this passage I would think more of it as lying is reason. Throughout this book, you see Raskolnikov reasoning and questioning himself about his theories for murdering the pawnbroker. He then lies to his family and friends and people that surround him consequently leading to his strong guilt. And as we know, in the end this guilt that was berthed out of his reasoning and his lies turns into the his confessions and the revelation of the truth.
I agree with most of what you guys have said that this passage is ironic because he is in fact being honest about his theory of lying.
People usually lie to justify their thoughts or actions. This is evident throughout Raskolnikov's behavior and reasoning in C&P. As Razumukhin personifies "reason," it's fitting that he would be the one that Dostoevsky uses to emphasize this theory.
"That's man's one privilege over all creation. Through error you come to the truth!" I really liked Razumikhin in this passage because he shows a different side of him that the readers do not get to see a lot of. He is obviously drunk, but this drunkenness makes him more real and developed as a human. He acknowledges that it is human tendency to make mistakes, and to make mistakes and face them is the development of a truthful human. "To go wrong in one's own way is better than to go right in someone else's." From that one line, I got the sense that Razumikhin believes that through mistakes and errors people stay true to themselves. Raskolnikov lied to himself constantly to justify his murders, yet in the end, he was led to the truth about himself and society.
I like Connor's post. I also think after lying to themselves and denying certain things, other characters are able to discover what they actually believe and who they really are. There are several instances when Rodya finds himself doing things, but he doesn't know why. He wants to visit Razumikhin (somewhere in part one) and he doesn't know why. He wants to kill the pawnbroker but he is afraid to really admit it to himself. In part six, chapter three, when he is going to Svidrigailov's, "He himself did not know what it was he could hope for from this man. Yet the man had a kind of mysterious power over him. Once aware of this, he could not rest." He really dislikes the man in the beginning for obvious reasons, but like we discussed in class, he ends up seeing himself in Svidrigailov.
There is one truth we can all agree on: Everyone lies because we're human. The weirdest thing, dispit being told that lieing is bad from a very early age, we do it anyways. And we think it protects us from the truth, but what it really does it makes the truth clearer. Razumikhin sees this as not a vice in the human nature, but a good thing that that we do.I think he sees it as that if we lie, we will get to the truth.
"If you lie--you get to the truth!"
That's an interesting little paradox, isn't it? When we lie, generally speaking, we are doing it to cover up the truth. To make it disappear for a moment or two. But at the same time, based on what this says, we get closer to the truth of the matter. I think he means that it give meaning to the truth and while we lie, we figure out what the truth really is.
So, how does lying lead to truth in Crime and Punishment? I think it leads in the same way as it often does in my experiences, as well as one would think it might. "If you Lie-you get to the truth!" Razumikhin says, "Not one truth has ever been reached without first lying fourteen times or so... but we can't even lie with our own minds." It's unfortunate, but people's first move whenever they're faced with a difficult situation is to lie. Truth seems to take a backseat, and be used as a backup plan if the lie is found out, or fails. This seems to be what Raskolnikov and others do. If the truth is going to be found out one way or another, you might as well take a chance to see if you can pass the lie. I think this is what Razumikhin is talking about. And, it often takes many, 14, a hundred or so, lies till the truth is uncovered. But, surprisingly, Razumikhin seems quite sure that in nearly all situations, the truth will be found out.
Razumikhin's perspective and insight on thinking is interesting. He believes in thinking for oneself. Despite the fact that he is drunk, his thoughts and beliefs are still clear. Razumikhin said"taking big nonsense, you will get to sense" shows a kind of deeper thinking any other drunk could think of. but at the same time he says that "lying is man's only privilege over all other organisms." This shows that he thinks that humans posses a higher power over anything else. The deceit is the novel lies in the suffocation of Rodya. Razumikhin believes that anything that is the truth is always going to be followed up or is going to be covered in lies one way or another. His use of deceit does not work when he confesses, however rodya was the one to ultimately confess on his own will, then to the cops which puts him in a lesser state of power then where he was before. By every lie comes another lie which just piles too much eventually leading to the truth.
In C&P, the idea of what makes us human is expressed and emphasized throughout the novel. In this passage, Razuminin expresses that idea by saying," I like them to talk nonsense. That's man's privilege over all creation. through error you come to truth. I am a man because I error." Like Niloy and others have said, Razuminin explains that our ability to err and lie differentiates us from all creation because it means that we have an ability to reason and think independently. Also, unlike any other creature, we have morals and can chose and distinguish right from wrong. Another important thing expressed by Razuminin is when he says, "To go wrong in one's own way is better to go wrong in someone else's. In the first case you are a man, in the second you're no better than a bird." Not only does this quote reinforce the human characteristic of reasoning and thinking independently, but it also seems to shed light into Raskolnikov's rationalization for the murder. He would rather adhere to his philosophy and theory of Crime and be right in his own way, than be wrong in someone else's ways. Maybe Raskolnikov believed that by adhering to his own beliefs, he was keeping his dignity and his 'humanness'. Through his erors, Raskolnikov was trying to find the truth of what made him human.
Also, all the lies that Rodya was telling seemed to weigh him down, ultimately leading him to his confession.
The act of lying in and of itself leads to an impulsive desire to confess the truth. Lying brings about a feeling of isolation that is mostly intolerable and the only cure for it is confessing everything. Raskolnikov is forced to lie about his account with the pawn broker many times and this lying is proven to be unbearable as he eventually confesses to Sonya and then turns himself in to the police.
"Lying in ones own way is almost better than telling the truth in someone else's way." Many things that are true to one person are lies to a different person. Saying something that may or may not be true just because someone else said it does the situation no good. Since many "truths" in this world are arguable, its better to voice your own opinion even if in fact your opinion is considered a lie. In voicing ones own opinion and believing in personal opinions individuals are able to decide for themselves what is true and what isn't. There are a couple interpretations to this quote and I just picked one.
Most people so far have looked deeply at how deceit and lying draw lines towards truth.
When I read this passage I inferred something else. I thought the most profound point Razumihin was making looked at the pursuit of truth; How it should be a sincere and most importantly, independent, journey. He points out that mistakes and errors are only natural when a naked and self based journey to truth is taken. I haven't gotten far in Hesse's "Siddhartha," but that book makes a similar point. Siddhartha inevitable paves his own path, even independent of the Gotama himself, in order to seek his own form of inner peace and truth. For example, when Razumihin says: "To go wrong in one’s own way is better than to go right in someone else’s," I think he summarizes the idea that the even if lies riddle the independent path to truth, it is still the best path.
It is interesting how he uses the word lie is used in this section. If it only meant, "to deliberately mislead by telling someone false statements," I would have to disagree with his claim that it leads to the truth. How can you say lying leads to the truth when people get away with lying all the time? People who are told lies often come to false conclusions and never know.
I believe that he uses the word "lie" to describe an idea that is simply not true, not one that is deliberately misleading. In this sense, "lies" do lead to the truth. As you can see from examining scientific advances, it takes many wrong theories with small truths in them to create more truthful theories.
I think that because of this, this passage doesnt really act as foreshadowing, for Raskolnikov lying to everyone is not the same kind of lie discussed here. However, this passage may be suggesting that Raskolnikov's theory is false.
I though the line “truth is not reached without lying fourteen times or so.” was very interesting. It is basically what happens to Raskolnikov. He lies numerous times to cover up his muder, but in the end he confesses his crime. I think that if Raskolnikov was the superhuman he claimed to be, he could have lied and gotten away with the murders. However he was not a superhuman (as he started to realize later on) so while he acted in the superhuman way, he could did not have the super human mentality ( I think if Raskolnikov was more like his foil Svidrigailov, who felt no guilt about his wrong doings, he would not have confessed)
"to go wrong in one's own way is better than to go right in someone else's. In the first case you are a man, in the second you're no better than a bird." This line almost seems to be encouraging Raskolnikov's theory.
Post a Comment