Was Dostoevsky an Atheist?

[Red-Headed]

@ OrphanPip ~ 'That's silly, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche were both before Dostoevsky.'

I am fairly sure that Nietzsche was highly influenced by reading Dostoyevsky's Zapiski Is Podpolya 'Notes From Underground'.

[Red-Headed]

He was a Mormon. It is a little known fact that his death was faked, and he emigrated to Utah and wrote westerns the rest of his life.

That's about how silly this discussion is.

[Desolation]

@ OrphanPip ~ 'That's silly, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche were both before Dostoevsky.'

I am fairly sure that Nietzsche was highly influenced by reading Dostoyevsky's Zapiski Is Podpolya 'Notes From Underground'.

He was. After reading it, he called Dostoevsky "the only psychologist from whom I can learn anything." He unfortunately never had the chance to read many other works by Dostoevsky, though. If I recall correctly, he had read 'Notes from Underground' only a couple of years before his mental breakdown.

[Red-Headed]

He was. After reading it, he called Dostoevsky "the only psychologist from whom I can learn anything." He unfortunately never had the chance to read many other works by Dostoevsky, though. If I recall correctly, he had read 'Notes from Underground' only a couple of years before his mental breakdown.

That sounds right. Dostoyevsky was more famous than Tolstoy in Russia at one time. They never actually met although there were plans to try & get them to. I don't think Dostoyevsky approved of much of Tolstoy's work. He also disliked Turgenev (who virtually discovered Tolstoy) intensely. He parodied him as Karmazinov, the famous writer toadying to the revolutionaries & nihilists in 'The Devils'.

[OrphanPip]

@ OrphanPip ~ 'That's silly, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche were both before Dostoevsky.'

I am fairly sure that Nietzsche was highly influenced by reading Dostoyevsky's Zapiski Is Podpolya 'Notes From Underground'.

Most of Nietzsche's work predated his exposure to Dostoevsky, though he certainly appreciated Dostoevsky. He is also certainly a very influential figure in the history of Existentialism, but Notes From Underground did not create the philosophy.

[Red-Headed]

I only know that he read 'Notes From Underground'.

[OrphanPip]

I only know that he read 'Notes From Underground'.

In 1887, after having already written The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, and Beyond Good and Evil. His philosophy was developed separately from Dostoevsky's novels, but it shares a shocking similarity.

[Red-Headed]

In 1887, after having already written The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, and Beyond Good and Evil. His philosophy was developed separately from Dostoevsky's novels, but it shares a shocking similarity.

I've read Daybreak, Zarathustra & Beyond Good & Evil, plus I have a few anthologies of Nietzsche's works.

Like I said, I am only really aware of the effect that 'Underground' had on Nietzsche. I think apart from Nietzsche's reading that, any other similarities were coincidental.

You may be interested in this.

[Desolation]

In all fairness, Nietzsche's most interesting works (Twilight of the Idols, The Anti-Christ and Ecce Homo) were written after Nietzsche discovered Dostoevsky, so it can fairly be said that Dostoevsky was an important influence.

[Mockingbird_z]

atheism wasn't common at that time as it is now or during USSR time. But in 20th century authors mainly questioned social issues - morality for instance but not God. the answer Dostoevsky gives in his novels - is to be human - you need to be with God. even after commiting a crime (e.g. Crime and Punishment)
P.S. try the Devils - it is also worth reading

[paperleaves]

Just because one has a curiosity for the mechanics of the mind of a genius author such as Dostoevsky means not that they are not judging the work by it's own merits
P.s.
Notes from the Underground is a brilliant work, incredibly revealing with a spin on existentialism that makes Dostoevsky all the more intriguing...If you haven't read it yet, I'm sure there are some cheap copies on Amazon or in your local half-price bookstore ^_^

[illiades]

There is no 'spin on' existentialism, every passage within the book is the underground man detailing his existential angst. The book is as close as anybody might ever come to explaining what existentialism is.

The perverse thing is, that, if you can appreciate the points Dostoevsky is making, truly appreciate them, then you will be unable to laugh or sympathise, because you will be reading about yourself. From a distance. On the 'horizont' as it were.

Lonely around people and lonely alone..... what else is there to be done but be alone?

[Dori]

Dostoevsky's intention in The Brothers Karamazov was to show the atheists that he could (with 'The Grand Inquisitor') construct a better argument for atheism than any atheist at the time. The rest of the novel after that is a refutation of his own atheist argument.

[bazarov]

In early life he was an atheist, and later became a great believer - both was greatly used in Brothers Karamazov, that's why both Ivan and Alyosha are looking so real.

[Antoin]

Searched on the Internet for one, and has come across another, but has all the same decided to leave the opinion. If I have correctly understood, there is a discussion atheist Dostoevsky or not. If you're interested, you can ask me different questions about Dostoevsky, and I'll try to answer you, but I assure you Dostoevsky was not an atheist. Dostoevsky's childhood passed in a Christian family, since the earliest childhood every day they read the Gospel, were learned as at the priest.
When Dostoevsky only started to write the first novels, he has got acquainted with critic Belinsky. Belinsky has found at once in it the big talent, but reproached Dostoevsky, with its belief, derided and played a trick on Dostoevsky. Belinsky didn't hide that was a socialist, and consequently also the atheist. In general on an extent of all life Dostoevsky had only one book which lay always on its table is "New testament". It is possible to speak much also about Christian symbols, in its creativity.
As I see that you discuss head «Great inquisitor» from «Karamazovs» much.
In general if who hasn't understood that he wanted to tell it actually I can result an opening address told on literart morning in favor of students of the S.-Petersburg university on December, 30th, 1879 before reading of head «Grand INQUISITOR», it explains much that the Author wanted to tell. (I translate as I can on English, I think in Eng variant in general there is no it as even in Russian such to find has made to me many efforts).

“One atheist suffering by disbelief in one of painful minutes composes a wild, fantastic poem in which deduces the Christ in conversation with one of Catholic high priests — the Grand inquisitor. The suffering of the author of a poem occurs because that he in the image of the high priest with outlook Catholic, so left from ancient apostolic Orthodoxy, sees truly the present attendant Christ's. Meanwhile its Great inquisitor is, in effect, the atheist. That sense that if you will deform Christ's belief, having connected it to the purposes of this world all sense of Christianity will at once be lost also, mind undoubtedly should run into unbelief, instead of a great Christ's ideal created only new Babel tower. The high sight of Christianity at mankind goes down to a sight as though on animal herd, and under the pretext of social love to mankind not so not disguised contempt for it is. It is stated in the form of conversation of two brothers. One brother, the atheist, tells a plot of the poem to another.”

p.s. Though some time ago I was in the U.S. and I had to learn your language, but still I know it's bad enough to fully express their thoughts. My apologies for the various errorsin the text.