Another word for i have the right

In the novel «Crime and Punishment» everything is subordinateddisclosure and understanding of a deep moral idea. No question deserves an unequivocal answer. In his confession, the protagonist in his heart exclaims: «Am I trembling or have I a right?», As if seeking an answer from myself, from my companion, from the supreme forces. Can a person encroach on the life of another, for the sake of victory over the world’s evil and for the sake of universal happiness? The answer seems obvious. But for some reason even today, a century and a half after the publication of the genius work, the question does not lose its relevance.

Motive of crime

Once a poor student is planning to killthe old woman. In the district about this woman goes ungainly glory, as if she is a «bloodsucker», and because of her monstrous greed people are dying quiet, unhappy, but without malice.

Rodion Raskolnikov needs money not forsatisfaction of low-gain selfish desires. With the help of them, he will be able to graduate from university, help his mother and sister, get out of the debt hole. Then he will certainly fight his whole life against the injustice and suffering of people. The proxy is just a «useless louse.» Her death — a small loss. To execute a trial over it is a step that must be overcome. Only with the help of this crime will Raskolnikov gain strength and cease to be an unhappy creature forced to drag on a miserable existence. «Am I a trembling creature or have I the right?» Dostoevsky put into these words the torment of the human soul over the age-old question of whether all means are suitable for achieving a good goal.

Confession

Only two weeks from the moment of the crime, andRaskolnikov admits in his crime to Sonia Marmeladova. On the question «Am I trembling or have I the right?» Then he will not have an answer. He could not realize his immoral plan, despite the high goal and good intentions. Sonia will help him to comprehend his terrible act, but repentance will come much later, in penal servitude.

On the day of his meeting with Sonya, he is terribly worriedthe upcoming conversation, since he already feels that his soul has split into two parts. He committed murder, but to use the money earned as a result of this atrocity is beyond his power. Nobody put him a judge and did not give the right to decide who to live with, but to whom to die. But to go with confession to the investigator, he believes, does not make sense. They will not understand him, but only laugh: they robbed him, but did not take money.

Meanwhile, the bailiff of the investigative cases nameThe criminal was known. The only evidence was an article that Raskolnikov wrote shortly before the events described. This article would have no weight in the court. But something in it indicated that the murderer sooner or later himself admits everything.

Raskolnikov’s article

With this composition everything begins. In it, Raskolnikov tried to prove the existence of «higher people» and their right to commit crimes. Strong personalities move the world, others — only material in the hands of the strongest. All people in his article Raskolnikov divides into two types: the lowest and the highest. People of the second kind are destructive in nature. But they destroy the present in the name of the future. And if a strong person needs to step over a corpse or blood, then he gives himself permission to do this, alone. Such a person has the right to everything.

Raskolnikov, undoubtedly, considers himself to be the secondthe world. But here he has a completely logical need to prove to himself this involvement. He asks the following question: «Am I a shivering creature or have I the right?» How did this confidence that he was allowed to violate the law if he had not done this before? Thus, the killing of an old woman is not only a way to get out of poverty, but also to affirm to oneself the right to a crime, and thereby involvement in strong people, those to whom everything is permitted.

Investigator and criminal: psychological duel

Porfiry Petrovich called the article Raskolnikov ridiculous and fantastic. But the sincerity of her author did not leave the investigator indifferent.

He does not have evidence, but how committedcrime, speaks of the ardor and imbalance of the murderer. The perpetrator is not led exclusively by the greed for profit, which is evident to the experienced investigator already at the first stage of the investigation. The style in which the robbery is committed indicates that the author is able to make the first step, but that’s where to stop. His motives — dreams that have little to do with reality (commits murder, but does not shut the door, hides money, but returns to the crime scene). As if he wants to prove something to himself, as if he asks himself: «Am I a shivering creature or have I the right?» The author of the utopian article also reflects on rights. And he is sure that everything is permissible for clever and strong personalities. Porfiry Petrovich understands that the author of the article and the murderer of the interest-bearing woman are one person. True, theoretical reasoning turned out to be inapplicable in practice. The founder of the theory did not take into account the existence of other values ​​- virtue, love, self-sacrifice.

Lizaveta is an accidental victim

Raskolnikov himself gave himself the right to murder. According to his theory, without victims it is impossible to change the world for the better. Destroying a useless person will not bring any harm to others. And with the death of Alena Ivanovna her debtors only sighed quietly. But the student Raskolnikov has a cold heart only on paper. To kill an old woman who made a fortune by usury, «drank the blood» of the unfortunate, is not an easy task, the ambitious Rodion Romanovich is confident in his righteousness, and therefore, the pains of conscience are not frightening to him. However, what about the unrequited and meek Lizaveta, who does not appear in the apartment of the old woman on time? Raskolnikov did not plan her murder. «Am I a shivering creature or have I the right?» Is a dilemma that he can not solve even because the victim is a quiet innocent being.

Svidrigailov

Raskolnikov and Svidrigailova literarycritics call spiritual twins. They are united by a crime. They are both, by their own estimation, «the right to have». Their fates are similar. But if a poor student, going to a crime, asks the question «Is I a shivering creature or have the right?», The meaning of which has a deep implication and is connected with the continuous torment of conscience, Svidrigailov commits atrocities without any remorse. He lives on, murder perceives very coolly. Crime for him is a means by which he can live as he wants. In his soul, there is no place for good thoughts and struggle against injustice. There is nothing in it at all. And it is from his own spiritual emptiness that he perishes.

The death of Svidrigailov finds a response in the soul of the main hero of the novel. After it, he realizes his death and understands that on the ill-fated day he did not end with the old woman, the interest-bearer, but with his own soul.

Sonechka Marmeladova

With the help of this image, Dostoevsky expressesopinion, the opposite of Raskolnikov’s theory. Sophia Marmeladova is the personification of hope and love. For her, all people are equal. And the main belief of this character is that it is impossible to achieve happiness through crime.

Raskolnikov and Marmeladova live in different worlds. He is guided by the idea of ​​spiritual rebellion, it is Christian humility. Thanks to compassion and empathy, she preserves her soul and remains a pure and sincere person, despite the moral and moral mud that surrounds her. Confessing to Sonia in the murder, Raskolnikov, confused, gives the reasons that prompted him to commit a crime. Among them is the reluctance to see the suffering of the mother and sister, and a heightened sense of justice, and the desire to get educated and get out into people. «Am I a shivering creature or have I the right?» — he asks a question that has now become rhetorical, because thanks to Sonia he understands that he is no better and no worse than others. Each destiny has its own way, and nothing depends on the person. Only from God.

Laurels of a small Corsican

Raskolnikov wants to understand who he is, askingthe question «Am I trembling or have I the right?». Tearing in the search for truth, he puts forward a monstrous idea. His idol was Napoleon. And not by chance. This man was a cult figure of the XIX century. In the creation of his cruel philosophy, Rodion Romanovich continually looks back at Bonaparte, who was the violator of moral norms and public order. Napoleon sacrificed everything for the sake of satisfying the thirst for power, disposed of hundreds of human lives. And he did it calmly, calmly, indifferently.

Once you divide people into two categories, the heroThe novel is concerned about which of them he himself is. Napoleon created a story. He saw clearly his goal, and the death of innocent people did not worry him. Raskolnikov did not dream of becoming a great commander. He wanted to see happy mother, sister and all the destitute and unfortunate that surrounded him. For this, he believed, it was enough to kill one worthless person, a «useless louse.»

The Marmeladov family lived in inhuman conditions with the help of their daughter, who had to sell herself. Raskolnikov donated all his money to them. But I could not use stolen goods.

Raskolnikovs in world history

«Am I a shivering creature or have I the right?»- a quote that, when closely examined, is associated with the most terrible slogans in the history of mankind. The division of people into «trembling critters» and «the right of having» resembles the theory of a superior race created by the German Nazis. Raskolnikov is often associated with the theory of the «superman» Friedrich Nietzsche. Such a consonance is not accidental.

Being on hard labor, Dostoevsky met on more than one occasionlike young aggressive dreamers. They were depressed by social inequality. This spirit of discontent was in the air until the beginning of the next century. Nietzsche created the theory that was expected. Many wanted to become strong and change the world. And there was nothing criminal about this. If it were not for terror and violence, without which there was not a single political and social transformation.

Dostoevsky in his novel sought to convey toreaders, that evil can not bring benefit to anyone, and above all to the one who committed it. Raskolnikov’s famous question remains open only to those who do not share the philosophical and moral position of the writer.

</ p>>