The Failed Ubermensch: Dostoevsky's warning on Nihilism - Crime & Punishment video essay
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- Join Philosophy Vibe as George presents a video essay on Crime and Punishment. This video will look into the character Raskolnikov and how Dostoevsky writes this character to be a warning on Nihilism.
Grab a copy of Requisite Release, our philosophical fiction book - available worldwide on Amazon as Paperback & eBook
USA - www.amazon.com...
UK - www.amazon.co....
Canada - www.amazon.ca/...
Australia - www.amazon.com...
Grab a copy of Requisite Release, our philosophical fiction book - available worldwide on Amazon as Paperback & eBook
USA - www.amazon.com/dp/B0BQ9L11BB
UK - www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0BQ9L11BB
Canada - www.amazon.ca/dp/B0BQ9L11BB
Australia - www.amazon.com.au/dp/B0BQ9L11BB
I really appreciate the application of this book as a text against nihilism rather than as a text against atheism and moral anti-realism. I was expecting to see the typical ‘without god everything is permitted’ argument but instead this video details a more personal and psychological matter of the metaphysical value we find in certain concepts and how we can approach these concepts to avoid falling into the pit of nihilism.
Dostoyevsky was more mature in his thinking than Nietzche and had tremendous foresight. I believe this is what we call wisdom not just smarts. Yes I've consumed Crime and Punishment in its entirety. God is eternal. God is the only source of Objective Morality. Not the man who fancies himself a God and who's "morals" are Subjective. No need to reinvent the wheel and those who try will always fail and there will always be those who will try. They are deluded by overinflated egos and will bring themselves and others ultimately to foolish harm on the basis of selfish whim.
I know that people dont want to admit that evangelicals or religious fundamentalists are correct when they say without God there is no morality, but they are correct. If one rigorously follows modern science one ends up with some very disturbing ideas. Thankfully no one actually rigorously follows it; Neitzsche made good points here. The main ethical theories today just dont make sense. Look at consequentialism for example, it is premised on the idea of maximizing the good for the greatest number of people. One needs more detail for that to be applicable to the world so consequentialists almost always choose pleasure to maximize; this almost always involves the idea that because pleasure is natural it is good. However much of modernity is premised on the idea that nature is not normative. If nature doesn't give two shits about us and we can bend it to our will then why should we care what it says? The other is Kant's account of self legislation which doesn't really work. First depending on which version one uses, it is not even secular. The other is the whole idea that people can be bound to a law that they are the authors of law is just absurd. If we can change law however we want, then sure our actions will follow the law; it is just true in the most trivial of sense. In order to be bound by law, it has to apply even when we don't want it to apply. Kantians will say that this isn't what Kant means but that is hard to square with his claims that morality is self-legislated and not legislated and that one cannot have knowledge of things in themselves which one would need in order to know the structure of reason or the nature of the human person. Kant's self legislation just devolves into a Neitzschian account of self legislation which is might makes right. The main ethical theories of modernity try to show that a morality can exist without the existence of God but often fails on its own terms.
"without God there is no morality."
Personally, I don't believe that morality exists beyond the philosophy of mankind. I think its entirely subjective.
The shapes and temperaments of various cultures will dictate the form that morality takes in accordance to its own climate. Something that is fine in one place can become immoral in another. In cultures dominated by religious views, immorality occurs. In cultures where religion is primarily absent, immorality occurs. My thinking is that whether or not God exists or is present will have no bearing on the failures of people. Even biblical figures who knew god personally could behave in immoral ways.
Here's my take
Without God there is no morality. With God, there is still no morality.
Both religious and secular belief systems will devise their own markers of what is and isn't moral. People will then (presumably) live in a way that attempts to abide by those systems. If you take a thorough and honest look at any moral system, they all have their own flaws.
@@feignsanity I would agree with you to a large degree. I think that in order for there to be objective morality there needs to be a God. I am just committed to that conditional. I am not saying that God exists or that morality exists.
@@macattack1958 I guess that's fair.
@@macattack1958 Hmm, really? How exactly did you arrived to the conclusion that objective morality needs God?
@@feignsanity You believe there's no morality OK so you believe that murder is not wrong.
I hope you guys make a video discussion with the question "should the rich help the poor?". Thank you☺️
No
Poor are poor cuz they're lazy
first define what exactly you mean by "help"
No problem if rich help poor in education and healthcare. After this, it will be responsibility of poor to learn and grow.
Remembered a quote " instead of feeding poor, teach them how to earn "
Yes if there is severe poverty, govt should help.
Even socialism is helpful only in case of education and healthcare. Rest we have seen how problematic socialism is.
Nowadays people just fill the void with video games and porn.
And TH-cam videos.
Video games have been shown to improve motor skills and critical thinking skills such as strategic planning.
There are things far worse that people waste their time on like w0ke activism for extrem¡st political causes
@@mugsofmirth8101 And also completely waste your life.
@@mafelfanai if you're playing XBox games then yes, I agree. Microsoft products are trash! 😉
Use batter voice
Full Metal Alchemist Brotherhood critiqued the idea of Ubermensch very well. A character tried to become God by separating himself from his human origins and ended up failing. I think the moral was that you are human and you wont be more than that, but being a human is already more than enough. 10/10 recommend!
Nietzche intention is live authentic and create our own meaning to live passionately
just read crime and punishment a month ago, truly one of the greatest books and I am using it as inspiration for demonstrating philosophy through video games as Dostoevsky demonstrated philosophy through fiction and literature, it gets to the heart of our intuitions and mind, the very phenomenological make-up of our lives is scrutinized through fiction and this is why Dostoevsky is such a brilliant author
Do we need god? Why would we need god? Science answers all of these questions for us.
I do think there can be an objective moral reality. If we define moral as being good, and good being that which we live our life by, then I think it’s simple. Minimise suffering.
Anything that can suffer, its aim should be to minimise its suffering, and the suffering of others.
None of this is simple to achieve, but the idea to me seems simple enough.
Everything else seems like unnecessary embellishment. Set dressing of sorts. Becoming an Uber Mench doesn’t seem to make much sense to me. That sounds like a power game. I’m better than you, and this human form, this human realm and rules. Based on what? The idea somehow that this will make you feel good about yourself? Maybe. It hardly seems durable though. When the next Uber mench comes along, can they just knock you down a peg? Knock you off the Uber mench high horse?
The death of god? Which god?
Xlnt presentation! The Brothers Karamazov, The Fall, Invisible Man.
Anton Chigurh;;;;; No Country for Old Men
More Dostoevsky pls!!!!
Okay, so I don't comment that often anymore but I did feel like the questions you raised at the end were very interesting, so(Also, I'm aware that discussions of religion can get heated and I would understand if anybody disagrees with me but do so calmly and logically, heck it might lead to an interesting debate):
1-I think it certainly can be but only if we find something to replace religion with, otherwise the world may indeed fall victim to Nihilism and immorality, We do have a lot of secular philosophy focused on ethics and meaning and I feel like a potential way to restore morality and purpose is to make them an important part of school and university curricula worldwide and also part of people's everyday lives later on somehow, but to prevent what happened in Crime and Punishment we should also discuss criticisms of these theories(I like Nietzsche's idea of the Ubermensch and trying to be the best version of yourself a lot but I do find his stance on morality to be rather troubling and considering this book's message and Nietzsche's controversial reputation as a philosopher, I doubt I'm the only one)
2- Well, this is a tough one, I feel like there are actions that are more or less universally considered evil(murder and torture)but there are areas where different people will have different stances( like abortion or polyamory), again, I feel like there are scenarios where murder and torture can be justified or at least be understandable depending on a specific context( like the example you had in your video about Liberty where you brought up a situation where torturing someone who has placed a bomb to learn where it is to save others or killing someone in self-defense), so ultimately, I would argue that while there are some actions which are inherently evil, they can be justified in certain contexts so, I'd say we do not have objective moral truth, however, I do feel like the answer to the second part of this question is a strong yes, I want you to imagine a world where nobody has no conception of morality at all, that world would be pure chaos, I feel like morality is why we have societies in the first place otherwise we would have stayed in nature along with other creatures and wouldn't be anywhere near where we are now.
3-No, there are several secular schools of philosophy devoted to ethics( like Utilitarianism and Kantian Ethics) and there are also cases where people act religiously but unethically(The Crusaders).
4-Well, not necessarily, There still might be a god(as in a creator for our universe, but they might be different than how we have expected them to be, It is possible that we may have also gotten some things right about this god maybe not, however, I feel like the validity of religious texts as a perfect guide to the world has been undermined for good since even if everything else in these texts is right we still have flaws about the birth of humanity and the age of the planet, however, there are still lessons in religion that can be separated and applied in everyday life even if some of the facts it tried to describe the world are wrong(like Jesus's idea of loving your fellow man is capable of producing a lot of good in the world). Regarding metaphysical theories about god and the creation of our universe, I feel like the idea of a type omega civilization having created our universe in order to benefit them in some way seems very plausible(like maybe as an energy resource)or maybe, less terrifyingly Spinoza's God(as a sort of harmonious force with nature).
The thing that sticks with me most is that in the Dostoevsky book there is a sceen with a man beating to death his horse, for no reason. I am struck by this because I have also heard Nietzsche near the end of his life came across such an event and broke down in tears running to and comforting the hose saying "we are the same".
Such a strange parallel when you also showcase this book against the Neitzsche book.
Nihilism on its own may be detrimental to some but it can also lead to more powerful and enlightening philosophies like existentialism
Nihilism is merely the ‘sense of loss’ created by having the rug of false beliefs pulled from beneath your feet. Christianity is a pre-cursor to nihilism because (like Plato) it despises this world (that is, Life itself) and can only see value in a false world that doesn’t exist - and once the belief in the false world is lost, there is a sense that literally nothing is left. Nietzsche’s entire mission is to redeem and re-establish the value of Life itself, after almost 2000 years of it being denigrated by Christian slave morality.
I think nihilism is a problem. Finding your own purpose will typically lead to regret. And existentialism is not much better. We need a greater positive influence on the world. Otherwise those who grew up like me would have a hard time, finding positive ways to defined themselves for things to dedicate themselves to.
@@josefk332 I agree that Nietzche was dedicated to dismantling organized religion but just like crime and punishment he was not doing this for an altruistic purpose. Nietzche had a strict religious upbringing (as did a few other anti-religious philosophers), because of this “slavery“ he had to endure as a child he rebelled against this religion. He never saw the worth in it. You see this with kids that grow up in homes with alcoholic parents. Like me they grow up to detest alcohol until they realize alcohol is not evil. It’s the people that can’t control themselves around it that are the problem. The benefits of it are incredible. Sterilizing our surgical equipment, powering our cars. Nietzsche doesn’t trust people with alcohol or religion because it’s powerful. And I agree that some people are not worthy of that power but we shouldn’t bury our heads in the sand, and pretend that god doesn’t exist.
@@patrickmoore4278 I agree with you that Nietzsche did have a strong religious upbringing and his main line of criticism naturally aimed itself at Christianity, this being what was most familiar to him. However, Nietzsche saw himself as a prophet of what was inevitably going to occur with or without him pronouncing it - that is, the realisation that ‘God is dead’. This loss of faith (primarily brought about by science and the loss of humanity’s special status) would lead to nihilism, but only because of what had preceded it. It’s this sense of vital loss, and loss of direction whose implications Nietzsche most dreaded.
@@josefk332 I think I understand. Niezsche is talking about a hypothetical situation in which God’s death brings about a state of mourning and confusion to believers. The problem with this thought experiment is that it is not in good faith. He is not mourning the death of God he is celebrating it. He espouses that this is a good thing afterward. That we need to create ourselves as Gods (Ubermench’s). How do we do this? What does it look like? He doesn’t know. But Nietzsche says it is going to be great. A man who was a notorious, unhappy recluse. So what I am saying is that this situation isn’t proposed to better understand the implications of the death of God (or faith) would have on our planet. This situation has been Taylor made by a very smart, very unhappy man to do one thing. End his loneliness. Hear me out. If you were brought up in a religious house, going to religious schools and never quite fitting in. What do you think that you would do? As soon as he got a chance he left. He felt free for a while I’m sure but after a time, loneliness would start to cripple him. So he imagined a world where he would fit in. A place where God didn’t exist. Because, of course, none of this was his fault. I’m sure. This man dreamed of a world that would mourn the loss of its creator just so, he wouldn’t be alone in his rejection of God. A little psychology behind the philosophy goes a long way. Context to an otherwise purely innocent thought experiment, I’m sure.
Brilliant v
Brilliant Video mate! Great visuals aswell. I don't think there's an answer to life's meaning unless you have faith. All we can observe is that this life we live is very much absurd.
d
People who call themselves"happy nihilists" and even write books about it, need to watch this video to realize what a absurd thing that is to say.
Kindly Make Videos on Post-Modernism.
CAN YOU PLEASE DEBSTE DEJA VU
:00 such an intresting essay
can you explain stoicism with john pls?? my sister rlly likes the stoic thing but she cant explain it to me :((
Glad you enjoyed :) And thanks for the recommendation this is definitely on the list.
First!!!!
Excelente. Qué trabajo.
One point made in this video that I think is worth emphasizing would be the fact that nihilism is indeed the logical conclusion that follows from an atheistic worldview. Of course, you could replace that nihilism with existentialism, or even absurdism, (which often lead to hedonism) but that is merely an escape from nihilism the same way a drug like heroin or LSD is an escape from reality.
Hmm...very good insight though😮
Sir What do you propose then?
I believe LSD opens the door to reality.
@mugsofmirth8101 I sorry but I don't find your linking of nihilism or atheism to be very tasteful neither do I see how nihilism is some how the logical conclusion of an atheistic worldveiw and your insinuating that absurdism leads to hedonism is a load of horse shit and really oversimplified and misrepresent the philosophy
This video is your magnum opus. The message is huge! That’s what happened to Hitler and Putin. You saved my religious beliefs !
There is no god
@@Joseph-fw6xx lol you have no evidence for your claim.
@@Joseph-fw6xx it's been a whole month and you've shown no evidence for your claim.
The burden or proof is on you to prove your claim; isn't that how this works? LoL go ahead I'm still waiting.
there is a god but he is autistic. the evidence is everywhere.
Wonderful video!
Thank you.
Dear Lord, what a dreadful misinterpretation of Nietzsche’s Übermensch.
There is no god only evolution
Nihilism is often associated with depression and immoral behavior, but I think this is only true for people without direction and motivation.
Imagine a man that becomes deeply depressed and unmotivated, fails to keep his job, and becomes homeless. A stranger who sees him on the side of the road might assume that he is homeless because he needs money or other kinds of charity, when in reality he needs a drive to push him to improve and maintain his life. Money given to him will be quickly spent and he will have made no progress to becoming stable.
In the same way, nihilism does not remove a person's morality or motivation. Suggesting to someone that their life has meaning and significance does not help a man with a closed heart and a closed mind.
The world being devoid of meaning is interpreted as a negative, when in reality, it's entirely neutral. Personally, I believe in optimistic nihilism, a 'glass half-full' way of looking at meaninglessness.
Nihilism allows me to disregard arbitrary value systems in our society that would weigh me down.
Here's some societal expectations; I am supposed become married and have children, I'm supposed to make x dollars per year, I am supposed to believe in God, I am supposed to live up to the ideal of what a man or woman is, etc.
Nihilism allows you to abandon and ignore unhelpful and archaic value systems in favor of your own values. This paves the way to existentialism, the belief that people can determine their own meanings from life without it being handed to them. Nietzsche seemed to have his own concept of what the ubermensch is, but I think an existentialist is a sort of ubermensch. Someone who finds their own meaning from life. I wouldn't say they becomes gods exactly...