Ivan Karamazov

[8jcm4]

In Ivan Karamazov's the Grand Inquisitor, he argues the absurdity of believing in God because, in order to believe, you have to believe in an evil, capricious God. He says that people, when given true freedom, are most miserable because of the apparent inability to chose the best for themselves. Therefore, Ivan argues that it's best for the intelligent ones to control the lesser ones, and for the lesser ones to uncompromisingly submit to the leaders' control. I think this is ok as long as the leaders are Godly and follow Godly principles and don't adhere to what Ivan wants--leading the lemming-like people comfortablly toward their own spiritual destruction. What do you think?

[optimisticnad]

In Ivan Karamazov's the Grand Inquisitor, he argues the absurdity of believing in God because, in order to believe, you have to believe in an evil, capricious God. He says that people, when given true freedom, are most miserable because of the apparent inability to chose the best for themselves. Therefore, Ivan argues that it's best for the intelligent ones to control the lesser ones, and for the lesser ones to uncompromisingly submit to the leaders' control. I think this is ok as long as the leaders are Godly and follow Godly principles and don't adhere to what Ivan wants--leading the lemming-like people comfortablly toward their own spiritual destruction. What do you think?

I don't know where to start with this! Regardless of whether the leaders are godly or not I don't think intelligent people should control 'lesser' ones! Under any circumstances. You need to read novels like 1984, Clockwork Orange and Brave New World. What is one persons 'god-follwing principles' is not for another - this perhaps is most pertinent in the world today.

As for people's inability to choose the best for themselves - that may be true sometimes but the keyword in the sentence is 'choose'. Whatever decisions I make, regardless of their effect on me, I like the knowledge (or some would say illusion but let's not go down that path now) that I made the choice myself and not someone else, nor was it imposed on me.

If the more intelligent people controlled society - I see no evidence or guarantee that lives would be better. Intelligent people aren't always creative therefore there would be no outpouring of thought, comment, literature and other arts. What a sad world it would be.

I think it Karamazov contradicts himself - that people lack the ability to make the right decisions for themselves and therefore intelligent people should make their decisions - the assumption beign that the more intelligent people would be capable of making the 'right' decision for other people. We have the same dilemma.

I could go on but I won't.

[bazarov]

I think it Karamazov contradicts himself - that people lack the ability to make the right decisions for themselves and therefore intelligent people should make their decisions - the assumption beign that the more intelligent people would be capable of making the 'right' decision for other people. We have the same dilemma.

I don't see nothing contradict here, but I agree with you; it was after all the time when communist ideas start to grow, combined with nihilism.

[optimisticnad]

I don't see nothing contradict here, but I agree with you; it was after all the time when communist ideas start to grow, combined with nihilism.

Intelligent people can make 'right' decisions - really? And for others? They'll be making the wrong ones on behalf of the less intelligent people. Karamazov's (sp?) whole idea was that the less intelligent people can't make the right decisions for themselves - well it seems neither can the 'intelligent' ones. Contradiction. It assumes too much of the 'intelligent' people.

[bazarov]

Actually, that's how the world and humanity are functioning on last couple thousand of years. Whether you gave your permission or not, someone mostly makes decision instead of you - parents, teachers, bosses, prime ministers, presidents...

[Gladys]

I think it Karamazov contradicts himself - that people lack the ability to make the right decisions for themselves and therefore intelligent people should make their decisions - the assumption being that the more intelligent people would be capable of making the 'right' decision for other people.

Ivan is right in asserting that "people lack the ability to make the right decisions for themselves" and that "more intelligent people would be capable of making the 'right' decision for other people" But how does it follow that "intelligent people should make their decisions"?

"Intelligent people" can make 'right' decisions - really? And for others? They'll be making the wrong ones on behalf of the less intelligent people...It assumes too much of the 'intelligent' people.

No. Undoubtedly, "intelligent people can make more of the 'right' decisions" for others. Democratic laws are an obvious, though very imperfect, example of this principle.

However, "intelligent people" in positions of power over others are almost invariably self-interested, self-serving, partial, devious, manipulating, dishonest, corrupt, greedy, and riddled with other vices. They can only be trusted to make decisions about themselves!

Perhaps we need a benevolent theocracy without middle-men: omniscient god without his bishops and priests.

[optimisticnad]

However, "intelligent people" in positions of power over others are almost invariably self-interested, self-serving, partial, devious, manipulating, dishonest, corrupt, greedy, and riddled with other vices. They can only be trusted to make decisions about themselves! .

That's what I said and meant - they can be only trusted to make decisions about THEMSELVES.

[Theunderground]

Thats the thing with Dosty in TBK,he puts different and contradictory viewpoints on different characters without a concrete conclusion,and so then we can make a conclusion ourself.