Raskolnikov Rationalize The Relationship Between Crime And Punishment

Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment is a psychologically charged novel in which the primary element that plagues the protagonist, Rodion Raskolnikov, is not a person but rather an idea; his own idea. Raskolnikov has an unhealthy obsession with rendering himself into what he perceives as the ideal, supreme human being, an übermensch. Raskolnikov forms for himself a theory in which he will live purely according to his own will and transcend the social norms and moralities that dominate society. Raskolnikov suggests that acts commonly regarded as immoral are to be reserved for a certain rank of “extraordinary” men. Raskolnikov’s faith

In order to understand Raskolnikov’s guilt, it is important to understand the religious influences at work in the time period and place he lived in. In St. Petersburg where Raskolnikov lives, there are strong Christian influences from the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Church condemns killing people with few exceptions. Although is not a devout believer, these influences are still at work in the book. It is clear that Raskolnikov is struggling to fight God away because, as he says that “once God’s will gets mixed up in it, nothing will be done” (389). He acknowledges that the guilt he has is God’s doing, and he struggles internally to get rid of it. The idea that he is not able to feel good about the murder that he knows improved society. He states that “what bothers [him] is this permission according to conscience” (253). Even though he wants to establish his own moral code, it is impossible for him to do so because of the influence of religion.

I am going to write an essay on the retributivist approach and reductivist approach on punishment, comparing and contrasting both theories. To start off I will talk about the retributivism theory and the belief that an offender should be punished based upon the severity of the offense. I will them move onto just deserts which Is a modern retributivist theory which only focuses on crimes that have already committed making sure individuals get there just deserts for doing wrong. Next I will write about the reductivist theory which is all about trying to deter individuals from committing a crime or reoffending. Jeremy Bentham had a huge impact on reductivism believing if pain was to outweigh pleasure then it would deter individuals and overall nobody would have the desire to commit a crime as they are aware of the consequences they would have to face. Moving on to deterrence will talk about the two different types of deterrence; individual and general deterrence. Individual deterrence focuses on stopping individuals from reoffending whereas general deterrence is about deterring individuals who have never even committed an offence from turning to crime. Once writing about both retributivism and reductivism I will start to compare and contrast both theories, looking at the similarities and differences. Finally I will give my own opinion on the theories and which theory I believe is best, talking about how retributivist and reductivist punishments are different and the good and

Between all the other characters in Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov are the most similar in that Svidrigailov is depicted as Raskolnikov’s baser self and a depraved character. While Raskolnikov is seen to be a more repentant character who is afflicted with guilt after murdering the pawnbroker for his own selfish desires despite telling himself it is for the greater good, Svidrigailov is rumored to have committed several murders and feels nothing for his victims, one of them being his own wife. Throughout the story, Rask is shown as wanting to be like Svidrigailov just as Svidrigailov longs to be like Rask because each one has qualities that the other wants in their life.

    Ralkolnokove justifies his crime through a philosophy he has come up with: the man with power is the man to rule over all others. But this power is given only to those who dare take it. Raskolnikov wanted to see if he had the courage to take that power. He also had to

Crime and Punishment revolves around Raskolnikov and his amplifying guilt after he murders the pawnbroker, Alyona. From the beginning of the novel his poverty is displayed in his living condition, which is further described by the “yellowish dusty wall-paper peeling off the

Dostoevsky's 1865 novel Crime and Punishment is the story of an expelled university student's murder of an old pawnbroker and her sister. The idealistic ex-student, Raskolnikov, is ultimately unable to live up to his own nihilistic theory of what makes a "Great Man" and, overcome by fits of morality, betrays himself to the police. Exiled to Siberia, suffering redeems the unfortunate young dreamer. Crime and Punishment is similar in many ways to Balzac's Pere Goriot, especially in respect to questions of morality. In Balzac, the master-criminal Vautrin lives by an amoral code similar to Raskolnikov's theory of Great Men--unrestrained by conscience, Vautrin holds that laws are for the weak, and those clever enough to realize this may

“I wanted to find out then and quickly whether I was a louse like everybody else or a man. Whether I can step over barriers or not, whether I dare stoop to pick up or not, whether I am a trembling creature or whether I have the right…” (329). This quote shows the reason why Raskolnikov wanted to commit the murder. He wants to prove that he has the power to control his own life.

Being the protagonist in Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov is subject to most ridicule and analysis for his moral ambiguity and outlandish views. After reading about his dreadful murder of Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna, many come to the conclusion that Raskolnikov is purely evil. His lack of guilt and belief of justification for his crime surely points readers in this direction. Raskolnikov remains convinced that he is superior and that it was his duty to kill such a worthless person. Although some may view this as evilness, others may perceive it as downright ignorant. His atypical way of thinking doesn’t necessarily make him evil, but that is how some comprehend it. At certain points in the story, we see Raskolnikov not as a deranged man, but instead as a compassionate human being. After the murder, we see him carrying out various charitable acts, perhaps as an attempt to atone for his unforgivable crime. For example, we see some good in him when he gives Sonya’s family twenty rubbles after Marmeladov passes on. We also see this when he attempts to rescue a drunk girl from a man by giving her money for a taxi. As much as Raskolnikov expresses that he was justified in his actions, through his mental and physical illnesses it is apparent that he feels some guilt about it. This guilt makes him seem at least a little bit more human. For these reasons, when all is said and done, it is difficult to determine

After the gruesome murder in Part 1 of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov becomes indecisive in his guilt, ethics, and even daily actions, and through the uncertainty he loses all the control he had in his life. He goes around debating whether he should turn himself in, the people he should tell, and his future actions. In his indecisiveness he begins to feel helpless, and through his friend’s death and his total exhaustion, it seems like he loses only more control. His day culminates, as he arrives home, only to realize he forgot his family’s expected arrival, and becomes inadequately prepared to deal with his family’s caring concern. After having so much power through the murder

Classical criminological theory was introduced in 1764. The tenants of this theory became the backbone for the development of all criminological theories to come. After over 200 years have passed since its conception, is classical criminological theory still relevant to today’s society in explaining the causes of crime? This essay will address this question by discussing the major components of classical criminological theory while highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. The essay will also examine a more modern criminological theory, Merton’s anomie/strain theory, and decipher major differences between the two theories. This essay will also explain the aspects of classical criminological theory that are applicable or outdated in their

From declaring he wanted to become a Napoleon to wishing for financial independence to murdering for his own sake, he rattles off various motives, showing his obsessive rationalization (394-397). By presenting his conflicting intentions, Dostoevsky exhibits the chaos within Raskolnikov’s mind.

The title of Feodor Dostoevsky’s work, Crime and Punishment, leads the mind to think that the book will focus on a great punishment set by enforcers of the law that a criminal will have to endure, but the book does not really focus on any physical repercussions of the crimes of the main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov.

In Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, the murder of the pawnbroker bears little significance when compared to the 'punishment' that Raskolnikov endures. The murder is the direct result of Raskolnikov's Ubermensch theory. Though it takes a while for Raskolnikov to realize the profound mistake in his theory and in his logic, his tedious yet prolific journey eventually leads him to redemption. Suffering, guilt and societal alienation prompt Raskolnikov to reject his Ubermensch theory and ultimately achieve redemption. Through Raskolnikov's character, Dostoevsky reveals that the psychological punishment inflicted by an unethical action is more effective in leading to self-realization than any physical punishment.

The criminal must atone for it and must seek forgiveness. Raskolnikov at first tries to rationalize his crime by offering various explanations to himself. Foremost among these is his “superman” theory. By definition, the superman theory denies any possibility of atonement. The superman does not need to atone, because he is permitted to commit any crime in order to further his own ends. Raskolnikov also rationalizes his crime by arguing that the old pawnbroker is of no use to anyone; in killing her, he is ridding the world of an unpleasant person. Driven by poverty, he also claims that he wants to use her money to better his position in life. In the course of the book, he comes to realize that none of these excuses justifies his crime. Raskolnikov’s reasons for fearing arrest are equally complex. It is clear, however, that without the example and the urging of Sonya, he would not be able to seek forgiveness. He finds it remarkable that when he confesses his crime to Sonya, she immediately forgives him. She urges him to bow down before God and make a public confession. This act of contrition, she believes, will enable him to begin to cleanse his soul. Svidrigailov is aware of his own guilt, but he does not seek forgiveness. Unlike Raskolnikov, he does not believe in the possibility of forgiveness. In giving money to Sonya and others, he attempts a partial atonement for his sins. However, even these gestures are motivated partly by base self-interest. Because he is