Fyodor Dostoevsky | Notes From the Underground | Existentialist Philosophy & Literature
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 มิ.ย. 2024
- Request personal videos on Cameo - www.cameo.com/gregorybsadler
Get Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov - amzn.to/3maQ0DA
Support my work here - / sadler or here - www.buymeacoffee.com/a4quydwom
Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
Take classes with me - reasonio.teachable.com/
In In this lecture, I explore Fyodor Dostoevsky's piece, "Notes from the Underground", examining some of the key philosophical themes introduced, the character of the underground man, and what we can reconstruct about him, his ideas, and his life. This classic piece of Existentialist literature stresses the role and freedom of the individual, the value and pleasure of whim, and how the utilitarian, scientific mindset misses the point
#Dostoevsky #Underground #Existentialism #Logic #Ethics #Politics #Society #Philosophy #Literature #Perversity
Dostoyevksy is by far my favorite author and psychologist of all time. Even Einstein said "I get more from reading Dostoyevsky than from any scientist" and I think he truly is one of the greatest intellectuals of all time, right up there with Pascal..I've been looking for a lecture to listen to and this one is perfect. thanks!
You're welcome! Yes, he's definitely more along the Pascalian lines than, say, Cartesian ones
Dostoyevsky:“Talking nonsense is the sole privilege mankind possesses over the other organisms. It's by talking nonsense that one gets to the truth! I talk nonsense, therefore I'm human” Very informative lecture! Thank you!
You're welcome!
Taha Çakır I’m not sure, but it’s probably Razumihin in Crime and Punishment.
"To be a hero or to grovel in the mud - there was nothing in between."
Indeed
Maybe back in the 19th Century... in 2019 there is nothing but in between lol
John Travolta does a great job in this!
I always love finding out you've done a video on a book I just finished. Your lectures are great and the selection of them greatly influences my reading list.
Glad to read that (pun intended)
I 3 r 3738u
I asked about more Dostoevsky on your Grand Inquisitor video and you said you were planning this. Thanks for posting these by the way, I'm steadily making my way through all your videos and reading the texts. I think its really awesome that you're offering all of this on TH-cam for free. Much appreciated.
Nice video, I greatly appreciated you fleshing out some of the ideas. Particularly enjoyed the Platonic observation about consciousness and punishment; that a conscious/intellectual undergoes punishment by recognizing their wrong. It puts one in mind of that great Defeo line 'In trouble to be troubled, is to have your trouble doubled ....'for to sink under trouble is double the weight, and he that will dye in it shall die in it.' In many ways, I think that what happens in this book. Troubles consume the character. He is aware of himself but as an intellectual recognizes the repellent nature of his existence.
I think this connects to your idea of a disconnect; his inability to reconcile his idealized self with reality. He cannot cope with this imbalance and projects his problems onto others and works against his self-interest. By accepting the company of the prostitute into his life would have been to admit his weakness and pathetic existence. Doing so would have started a process of reconciliation of those two worlds and would begin his walk out of the underground and back into the light. When he gives the prostitute a five-ruble note he extinguishes any hope of salvation. It is an act that maliciously and intentionally labels her a whore, even though she has witnessed his soul and shared an experience that transcended a paid service into something real and tangible. He permanently offends an intentionally alienates the one person who could have made him a better person and brought him from the underground. In this action, Dostoevsky's suspicion of Enlightenment values is starkly presented , a man has worked against his self-interest when the greatest thing of interest was at stake: his soul.
Seems like Dov. was onto what Orwell would eventually expand on. Totalitarian systems perpetuate themselves by convincing you to oppress yourself. Of course, Dov. likes this, unlike Orwell. He wants you to be the maker of your own subservience and uses cheap morals to convince you to. A great writer, yes, but an utter bastard.
Your lectures never disappoint. Thanks for making these!
You're welcome!
Ah, I've been looking forward to this!
The first video of yours that I have watched, back in 2014. Also, the third educational video on TH-cam that I've watched overall (the first two were lectures by Irwin Weil, also on Dostoevsky), discovering how educational and good TH-cam can be. It's easier to watch videos than read, and when you want to relax it's great to have this content so you can do so in a meaningful way.
Glad you've been enjoying the videos for that long
Always appreciate those who post lectures as I am too unhealthy to go to college right now and this gives me the stress free environment to learn when I can! Thank you!
You’re very welcome - and I hope you recover your health!
Thanks a lot for sharing this, Greg.
Badass exploration of the underground man, wish my professor had the chance to cover in so much detail!
+Fernando Rojas Glad you enjoyed it!
Yep -- translation always involves interpretation. And with someone like Dostoevsky, its going to be more than just stylistic divergences.
Just ordered this book on Audible. Thanks for breaking it down a bit and turning me, for one, on to it. Interesting video.
+Byenia You're welcome! Glad you enjoyed it
i always thought that what is lacked in education is an honest presentation
of the great works. it's very nice that you are trying to introduce these works in a
somewhat bigger audience :)
i have seen only the beginning of this video, although i watched yesterday the
ones you made about kafka, and his story "metamorphosis".
i am writting because you mentioned in the beginning that -dostoyefski isn't
necessarily identical to the character he portrays at the basement, and camu
isn't necessarily the hero at "the stranger", rather (if i understood correctly)
they are vessels whith which they can explore a certain (existentialist) point of view.
i think that you are correct in that they use characters that can help them discover-
express, but i think that both of the authors characters are very much
found (at least a great part) in those stories.
Camu in his work "the stranger" is picturing an illness that is pretty common but
rarely spoken of because of it's confussing nature, depersonalization.
it is an illness that can change the way of perceiving the world and of yourself,
thous trigering solitude, strange behaviour, and generally an altered and negative
view of the world and yourself.
"the stranger" by camu is a kind of flag for those suffering from that, like is
dostoyefski's "the double"(i hope it's called the double in english:)).
anyway your videos are great, and it makes me feel like i do something
of value, instead of just serfing in the net.:)
You'll find Camus much more in his other writings, like the Plague. Similarly for Dostoyevsky, other works, other characters
I've very glad it was helpful for you -- and also glad to read that not only are you interested in Dostoyevsky, but that you have someone like your dad who is also so interested in him.
You're welcome!
your lectures are all incredible
I watch them for fun
:)
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed them
I finished all my philosophy major courses just under two years ago, and you were a great help. Now I'm almost done my second major (liberal arts). We're currently at the "fin-de-siecle" doing dostoevsky. Feels good to be watching your videos again and I hope I'll be watching more to finish the 20th century classes! :) I know we're doing Derrida and Foucault. Oh, and we're starting Nietzsche next week.
That's a lot of fun stuff to work through!
Excellent lecture! I feel I have gained a bit more understanding (no pun intended) on this important piece of existentialist literature. Thanks.
You're very welcome!
wonderful work!!
By far my favourite writer. I have read Crime and Punishment, Brothers Karamazov, The Idiot, and this. I'm just about to start The Possessed (Demons). I love these discussions thanks you so much for the uploads!!
Have you ever thought of making these lectures into podcasts as well as videos? A small part of me really wants to hear these lectures on the go.
Aha! That's what comes of letting too much time on my part pass between recording and uploading these lectures -- missing those connections.
I'm glad you like them. At least with the Existentialism vids, I'm actually starting to experiment with a new platform -- Learnist, which might be better for adding in all sorts of additional materials.
I'm very pleased to see that we are on the same page. TODOROV wrote his Lecture/Intro to the French Bilingual Edition IN FRENCH. You will find it most stimulating. OH! I've just noticed that a dramatic adaptation has been made of... THE GRAND INQUISITOR, with John GIELGUD being the bad evil Catholic Dominican guy in this fully justified denunciation of the Western Catholicism of the time (what one stands for, then, becomes the question). GOD BLESS, PhRR.
Thanks for the lecture just finished the book. Surprised this lecture came out when I was just 11
Yes, I've been creating videos for more than 10 years now!
You're very welcome -- book reading groups are a great way to work through Dostoevsky, I think.
It's striking how disimilar different translations of Dostoyevksi are! I'm compelled to read this translation now.
I was born and raised in the US but I'm of Russian heritage. As I've become older I've come to appreciate and love Russian Literature; Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Turgenev, Solzhenitsyn, Bulgakov, etc. I finished Notes From the Underground this morning and found this lecture invaluable. Thank you Prof. Sadler!
You're very welcome!
Great lecture! I enjoy your material. Very inspiring and clear. Which translation of this book are you reading from?
Yes, the Underground man, and his emphasis on rationaleless whim, is a theme running through Dostoyevsky's thought.
A good question. I'll have to think about that a bit -- what would be good secondary literature.
I'd say this -- some of the existentialists do discuss the other, often earlier existentialists. Shestov, Jaspers, Heidegger, and Camus in particular do that
Excellent, thank you.
You're welcome
Not yet. Right now, its either recommendations from their fellow students or their advisors, or they look me up on RateMyProfessor. They're pretty happy to have the videos, though
Well. . . there's lots of youtube to mp3 converter programs out there.
I'm not sure whether the lectures will transfer over well without a chalkboard and my gestures
Yep, I've read Bakhtin's work on Dostoevsky, and enjoyed it quite a bit.
I don't mind structuralists, actually, and I'll check out Todorov's translation sometime. I don't read Russian, but I read and translate French
Love you for your work
Thanks!
@@GregoryBSadler hello sir. Do you have videos on Nietzsche work? I am reading good and evil, good and bad the genealogy of morals. It is soooooo tough. I wish you could help in it
@@readingaddict use Google, buddy
@@GregoryBSadler thanks 😀😀
Well, at the very least some handouts and pages of useful links. Perhaps some overviews of the texts -- the sorts of things that for my college students I build into our course management system course shells
Thank you Greg for this contribution!! Envious of your chalkboard ;-) Great contribution sir!! 5:49, 8:24-9:47 [genius!!], 16:34, 19:23 [symbolic interaction not insecurity], 21:47 [immoralist], [24:11 I would have liked to hear you discuss this idea a bit more] 26:35!!! [Genius], 29:17 [sublime is technical jargon glad to hear that], 32:12 [the sublime aufhebung is of critical importance], 36:00 [the sublime is "no ordinary disgrace"], 52:23 Nice!! [Reason as Nymph], 53:39, 57:08!!!!
thanks for this video it help me so much in my paper
You're welcome!
I'm glad to read that -- but how did you know it was coming? Just too big of an existentialist piece for me to avoid entirely?
Hahaha! Well, unfortunately, it's not my chalkboard, but rather Marist College's -- and over the last summer, when classes were pretty thin on campus, I could shoot whenever I'd get on campus. Marist has excellent enrollment, which means all across campus, almost every chalkboard is in use from 8-9 -- just a small window on Wednesdays. I took for granted that luxury of a good chalkboard!
Thanks for these detailed time-notes! So, the different types of reading? Maybe another vid is neded
great video
omgnotaflake Thanks!
Where I'm currently teaching, just Introduction to Philosophy and Ethics. I've taught about 20 or so different courses over my career so far.
You can find my CV on my academia.edu page or on my main blog, Orexis Dianoeike
Well, the Dostoevsky will keep you working and thinking for years -- which is great. He's woven all sorts of interesting philosophical discussions, problems, arguments, etc. into his works and characters.
Yep, I'm familiar with the dialogue, and with the dilemma. Why?
Yes, he is certainly one of the greats. The Idiot doesn't seem to get as much attention -- but I certainly enjoyed that one myself.
You're very welcome. I should be shooting some more Dostoevsky vids later on this semester (hopefully)
also when Dostoevsky was in prison, he wrote so-called "Siberian writing-book" Сибирская Тетрадь (i don't know exactly how it's written in translation)! he wrote down his thoughts, prison songs and proverbs in this book! so "Siberian writing-book" became the main material for creation of "Notes from underground"!
Awesome channel
Thanks!
You're welcome
Could you post some stuff on Post-modern philosophy eventually?
Already answered that a number of times on my main page.
I always assumed Underground Man was Dostoevsky, to a large degree. Now that I'm finishing Brothers Karamazov, I'm forced to come to terms with how impossibly adept he was at writing convincingly from others perspectives. Like an out of body experience... Anyway, thanks. This was a good listen having read the book.
Glad you enjoyed the video. Yes, as far as a "multiple voices" and "who's the real D?" issues go, I think Bakhtin got it right about D. being a "polyphonic author"
Gregory B. Sadler It's certainly very humbling, to think that an artist could portray such extreme depth of experience without having necessarily having had to live it first. I saw about polyphony on the Wikipedia, maybe I'll go back and hunt down some external links. I've been wary of too much supplementary reading because I don't want any endings spoiled, but this looks safe enough. Thanks again.
GREETINGS PROFESSOR! It will be an honor for me to listen to your lecture. If you read French and Russian, I recommend to you a BILINGUAL French Edition where your Bulgarian colleague Tzvetan TODOROV not only translates from Russian to French, but provides an excellent lecture-introduction to the work (where he is not being structuralist at all). YOU ARE RIGHT, the subterranean man is NOT F.M.D.. BAKHTINE analyses the author's POLYPHONY. I look forward to follow your lecture. PhRR.
great video as always. But do you consider the underground man as an ''absurd hero'' in Camus's terms maybe?
I would say that the underground man could represent one of the many different ethics that Camus refers to in MoS. A hero, though? Probably not
I have noticed different interpretations of the title. Some use "The Underground," while others use just "Underground," as in "Notes From Underground." Is there any difference between Underground and The Underground?
No difference that would seem to make any significant difference
I'll just have to take your word for that, I suppose
Much better than Peterson. You're great. Congrats!
Jordan Peterson? Why the comparison? lol, JP is focusing on the psychology. And actually JP said that Dostoevsky is his favorite author in an interview. Just an unfair comparison...(Indeed Gregory Sadler does a wonderful work here).
@@iuricpeixoto Peterson uses the existential analytic of existentialist philosophy contained in Dostoevsky, for example.
But sometimes it is not like a epistemological tool, but a way to justify hypothesis without any prudence. Like its pseudo existentialist analysis of masculinity based in a supposed psychology.
The professor speaking here defined a theory of knowledge to go along. That's the reason of the comparison.
@@Tsypras I see that sometimes he appeals to these supposed axioms as a justification, but I don't think his take on masculinity is that messy scramble, most of the times he have to sum things up to the plebe if you will, his personality university course is much more prudent, I believe, have you watched it?
The idea that "in Russia there are no fools" and that the Russian romantic/intellectual never forgets the main "prize" aka an apartment, an easy job seems very interesting. Pushkin was kind of like that =)). In a way the underground man is the only fool in Russia
Sadler, see if this is correct-- I'm beginning my studies of Dostoevsky now ("The Brothers"). Doestoevsky is writing to the Russian middle class in their "vernacular." He is the ultimate imposter. His novel "The Double" indicates this quite well. It's a major theme in all his novels. He is writing the the Russian middle class in order to convince them of "other" things. Things quite opposite of faith, God, the church, history, laws, economic conditions, society as it is known. Freedom as an absolute seems to be the only motivation. Diversity without unity. Liberty without law. Doing without direction or restraint. There is no moral or natural law. Man defines himself.
I would not use the Double as the lens to try to read all of Dostoevsky's works through, no
Joseph Frank writes of "the narrative style" of Dostoevsky... See his index for the giant single volume edition. Frank views the "imposter" theme as the single major key in understanding Dostoevsky. I've long debated friends on the writer of-- "If God is dead, all things are lawful" ("The Brothers"). My friends say Dostoevsky is Christian. But, how could the proud progenitor of existentialism and father to Nietzsche have a genuine understanding of Christianity? Dostoevsky is an imposter. He is out to sell confusion regarding the human condition (dilemma) not appreciation. Dostoevsky, certainly in "The Brothers," could never bring his unreadable conundrum to a logical conclusion. The same is true for all his works, satellites for a confused, distorted world-life view. I guess this is why he is considered "great." He is so tortured. The soccer moms will love him. Not.
Garundi P. McGrundy Well, then you've got your answer already settled, don't you. No need for any engagement on my part. Good luck with it
Thanks for the sound board. I'll work on the Grand Inquisitor and stuff.
Could you tell me the name of that Greek historian which you mentioned earlier on in the lecture. Cheers
Joseph Wichman Thucydides -- the historian of the Pelopennsian War
Thanks
You're welcome! Someone well worth reading
Hi, I'm surprised you didn't mention the underground mans age ?? "Anyon who lives past 40 is selfish" right? Gr8 job my friend God Bless.
What kind of materials do you have in mind?
The sound is really low... can you increase the volume?
desire and reason don't often go together....that is for sure
Indeed!
It's not about desire and reason. It's about desire and love. Reason leads to love but if you only know desire, reason has a different meaning altogether.
It actually is about desire and reason. . . that's what gets explicitly discussed in the text, and considerable length, by the underground man.
Gregory B. Sadler Yes, there is nothing more to be said than what was said. Mm hm.
The Underground Man sounds like a perfect example of an INTP personality.
Thanks a lot for the lecture! The only thing that bothered me a little was that the type of courage claimed by the Underground Man was not the courage to discuss his cowardice but the courage to ignore scientific truth (the stone wall) that supposedly proves the pointless of all virtues, facing which "l'homme de la nature et la vérité" crumbles. He seems to be saying he would rather live in an ethical word of illusion by rejecting nihilism, even if it's scientifically "proven", rather than living in a hell-hole where one drop of one's own fat is worth a thousand lives of others. I don't know why he thinks atheism has to lead to destruction instead of altruistic socialism, but all his ramblings about the impossibility of bettering himself suggest that people are inherently evil (or "sinful" in his mindset) so that there's no redemption without a savior.
I think you're blurring together a number of things here. The wall doesn't represent nihilism, for one.
Reread this passage in Ch. 3: These gentlemen (the men of action) confronted with the impossible subside at once. The impossible means the stone wall. What stone wall? The laws of nature... as they soon as they prove to you for instance, that you are descended from a monkey..." It's obviously a reaction to "scientific/atheistic socialism" and the passage clearly shows that the men of action are cowards when it comes to defending ethical ideals - they bellow like bulls and cave in. D. definitely isn't mocking the UG on that point.
WadiFok So, two points. 1. That's not the comportment of what is usually called "cowardice" that the men of action are displaying. If YOU want to call it that, you go on ahead, but don't expect others to simply accept that. 2. scientific/atheistic socialism isn't the same thing as nihilism.
That's about all I'm going to have time to respond to here - lots of work to get to. If you want to have a longer conversation about these matters, you might want to book a session's worth of time
1) This is all in Chapter 3, I'm not making it up. The UG obviously inverts the conventional notions of courage and cowardice. He repeatedly points out that only stupid, limited people can take revenge because highly conscious people know that vengeance doesn't really help you at all, that perhaps they themselves are somehow partly to blame, that the person they are taking revenge on might not have been able to act otherwise, etc. And saying that men of action bellow like bulls before giving in immediately to the wall of scientific truths with positive relief (like the Nazis who adopted racism because of "eugenics", although that was prophetic, of course) , is clearly an accusation of hypocritical cowardice infinitely worse than not slapping somebody back 2) I agree with you but I seriously doubt that D. would. That's the whole point of the crystal palace. He thinks there's no salvation without Christianity.
Hahaha! I must be fortunate. It's not from years of clean living or consistent exercise
we did on later videos. This one, no
Have you ever had students ever say they took your class because they saw you videos on TH-cam?
Well, my own view is that it ends up being a false dilemma, once you actually start thinking through traditional monotheistic understandings of God, where the goodness of things does reside in them, but also flows from the divine nature.
Not to say that there aren't plenty of Jews/Christians/Muslims who don't adopt a very "voluntarist" position -- things are good just because God says so, etc. And plenty who would set up some moral standards first, and then try to squeeze God into them!
interesting lecture, but if you decided to discuss this book, you have to consider some factors, historical and biographical ones! (actually as well as any other book) nevertheless it's necessary to consider the time which this book has been written in! what kind of thoughts and mainstream of those days has influence on it!
Thanks for the advice about reading books
can someone explain to me what is existentialism and what is the difference between exist. and nihilism? is existentialism form of nihilism? they say it's similar but it doesn't sound similar to me. so what is what?
Perhaps watch the video discussing What is Existentialism?
existentialism is a very nebulous and overused term to describe a wide range of philosophical thoughts and ideas
In its popular use, yes. If that's meant to actually address what we study as "existentialism", no
Ok let me try, existentialism is the philosophy of living, how you live your life, in that life, some people rejoice in the liberation of having no past or future as camus calls it, having nothing before birth and nothing after death, now this news, can give rise to two sort of perspectives about life, 1. you ither embrace the liberation and dignity, or 2. you can die of having no hope of redemption, the second group of people are called nihilists, the sad philosophers who cannot think existentialism as freedom... the first group might be called happy existentialists i don't know :3
Shuvo Shams
I suppose since I'm older than 40. Hahah!
'they'll pop you in the face": Except in California, because of its harsh laws. Fun fact.
Good content. Would greatly appreciate a refresh though if possible. Audio doesn't hold up too well and would enjoy hearing a fresh take as well.
If you want to pay for the time and work involved, then we can consider it
10:39, No, not fear. SHAME. This is a book of shame, and obviously, like most of us, we either deny it or cant or want to recognise it because SHAME is too painful to even admit, because that in of itself is.... shameful.
Well, glad you could clear that up. Looking forward to seeing your video or blog post setting the matter straight of how to interpret this work
I think Chekhov was the most existentialist of all the Russian authors.
+SunshineInWoods Why?
Because in Dostoyevsky religion is still portrayed as the way out of an existential crisis. Whereas Chekhov, and this distinguish him from any other Russian author, does not commit itself to any particular stance.
The sensorial experiences of Chekhov characters become the only context in which their ideas are valid. He is less interested in metaphysical statements than in the stimulus and words that make people formulate such statements.
Almost all his characters live in closed boxes, they meet and conflict because they cannot get away from each other, not because they want to discuss life and death. In this, the Chekhovian stance of impossibility of communication among individuals anticipates some of the issues Sartre raised.
Finally, by constantly reminding the oblivion after life, he makes clear the ideal of living in the present, committing to other human beings to break out of isolation and acting to protect the beauty of the living earth.
Six years late.
It may be a more modern interpretation. Or maybe I am projecting...
but I cannot take the UM's ramblings at face value, to me they seem more to be excuses than actual reasons for his behavior and situation.
It's funny that you'd somehow think that there's something further behind the character's discourse. You must have a different version of the work, where Dostoevsky tells you the reader when the Underground Man's real motivations are
@@GregoryBSadler I guess I just have trust issues
Това не е точно изповед. На ман ми звучи, като самоанализ, вид психологическа терапия. Мисля, че по този начин е търсил образа на поредния герой за следваща книга. Иначе лекцията ви е добра и дава доста хляб за размисъл.
Everyone's got an opinion, I suppose