In Dostoevsky’s Notes from Underground, the topic of rational egoism is discussed throughout all perspectives; Chernyshevsky, being an advocate of the ethical philosophy, whereas the Underground Man is against this rational. As per Chernyshevsky’s view, to be rational is to calculate how to maximize one's ‘real profit’. Egoism is the thesis that all humans ought to pursue their own life interests, desires, and motivations in order to reach their path to success. Though humans require to act on certain aspects of egoism to promote their own interests, it is not practical to enforce this logic where all humans are practicing a theory where renunciation of self interest is used consistently and, or, at all times. Chernyshevsky sought a material,
…show more content…
He claims that people value the ability to apply their individual free will, even if it runs contrary to their best interests, more than their value of reason. The underground man's arguments for freedom address Chernyshevsky's 'rational egoism.' He believes freedom cannot be calculated; Dostoevsky's arguments against rational egoism proceeds as such, "And since all wantings and reasonings can indeed be calculated - because, after all, they will someday discover the laws of our so-called free will - then consequently, and joking aside, something like a little table can be arranged, so that we shall indeed want according to this little table" (27). The Underground Man ridicules the type of enlightened self-interest that Chernyshevsky claims as the foundation of an idealistic world. The abstract idea of cultural and legislative systems relying on this rational egoism is what the protagonist detests. Where the Underground Man places himself in this messy view of society can be quite complicated. He is very open about his dislikes of the world, but he also admits that he understands the enjoyment in "a cup of tea with sugar in it" (these being symbols of a non-corrupted society). This is what separates him from rational egoists and utopian believers; the desire that comes and goes that makes him want to get involved, could be the conclusion of what drove him to the
He claims that people value the ability to apply their individual free will, even if it runs contrary to their best interests, more than their value of reason. The underground man's arguments for freedom address Chernyshevsky's 'rational egoism.' He believes freedom cannot be calculated; Dostoevsky's arguments against rational egoism proceeds as such, "And since all wantings and reasonings can indeed be calculated - because, after all, they will someday discover the laws of our so-called free will - then consequently, and joking aside, something like a little table can be arranged, so that we shall indeed want according to this little table" (27). The Underground Man ridicules the type of enlightened self-interest that Chernyshevsky claims as the foundation of an idealistic world. The abstract idea of cultural and legislative systems relying on this rational egoism is what the protagonist detests. Where the Underground Man places himself in this messy view of society can be quite complicated. He is very open about his dislikes of the world, but he also admits that he understands the enjoyment in "a cup of tea with sugar in it" (these being symbols of a non-corrupted society). This is what separates him from rational egoists and utopian believers; the desire that comes and goes that makes him want to get involved, could be the conclusion of what drove him to the