Raskolnikov Morality Analysis

384 Words2 Pages
For most of the novel, Raskolnikov believes that there are extraordinary individuals among an otherwise mediocre mankind that are so rare that they can rightly disobey laws and conventional morality. Raskolnikov identifies himself as a member of this elite group, even comparing himself to Napoleon. This mentality is most prominently seen in his reasoning for the murder. He felt that as an extraordinary individual, it was his right and duty to eliminate the pawnbroker from society. This thinking will slowly deteriorate as Raskolnikov’s guilt wears it away to reveal Raskolnikov is just as unremarkable as everyone else. Dostoyevsky makes it clear that this “superman mentality” is extremely harmful and promotes isolation, hatred, and a poor moral compass. Raskolnikov’s harmful ideology hurts him by separating himself from society, hurts his relationships by making them superficial, hurts society by fueling elitism, animosity, and anarchy. A modern example of this theory could be seen in American politics and American entertainment culture. Many politicians seem immune to the laws due to their leadership status. Many of them feel impervious to normal laws and failures- for example, many politicians get out scott-free after clearly committing acts like tax-evasion, sexual misconduct,…show more content…
Raskolnikov didn 't kill Alyona because of his poverty and his debt, he killed her because he thought it would be useful to. Raskolnikov reasons that if Alyona were dead, everyone would be better off. He reasons that after the murder, people could have their items back and many problems would be fixed. By hurriedly hiding away the items, the premise for which he killed disappears. It becomes clear that, after never going back to retrieve the items, the murder was only for selfish reasons. By not retrieving the items, Raskolnikov becomes more guilty and his warped reasoning is put on full

More about Raskolnikov Morality Analysis

Open Document