Jordan Peterson breaks down and explains the novella Notes from Underground, written by Fyodor Dostoevsky.
Fyodor Dostoevsky is one of the most significant writers in the history of literature. Born in Moscow in 1821, he was a Russian novelist, philosopher, and journalist, and is best known for his penetrating explorations of the human psyche in his novels.
One of his most famous works is “Notes from Underground,” a novella published in 1864. The novel is a first-person account of an unnamed narrator who is living in St. Petersburg and is often referred to as the Underground Man. The Underground Man is a former government official who has become disillusioned with society and has withdrawn into himself.
The novel is divided into two parts. In the first part, the Underground Man discusses his philosophy of life and his belief that human beings are not rational creatures, but are instead driven by irrational impulses. He is critical of the idea of progress and believes that human beings are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. He also discusses his own sense of isolation and his inability to connect with other people.
In the second part of the novel, the Underground Man relates a series of incidents from his past that illustrate his ideas about human nature. These incidents include an encounter with a prostitute and a confrontation with a former schoolmate.
“Notes from Underground” is a complex and thought-provoking work that explores the human condition in a profound and insightful way. Dostoevsky’s portrayal of the Underground Man is both sympathetic and critical, and his analysis of the human psyche is both compelling and unsettling.
The novel has been interpreted in many different ways, with some critics seeing it as a critique of Western rationalism and others seeing it as a reflection of Dostoevsky’s own personal philosophy. Regardless of how one interprets the novel, there is no denying its power and its enduring significance as a work of literature.
source
#1
Great video🙏✌️
Dostoyevsky is right and Peterson also, but the way the Peterson portrays it is wrong. The purpose of financial security is not to be satisfied. The purpose is to free us to pursue other causes, higher goals, to evolve so to speak. Peterson portrays it like there is nothing more than everyday struggle to feed ourselves and that is the sole reason why we evolve. Well fuck that. Maybe that is his purpose, maybe he sees he is somehow stuck the minute he stopped struggling for the basic survival. Well not me and not most of us. We can evolve past the point where our basic needs are met.
I read it in college, I agree with Dr Peterson
Sounds delightful. I'll pass.
Well, if Dostoevsky says that's "the way people are", then that's the way people are! Harrrruuummpppfff! Yes, some people are that way, but not most, in my experience. And nobody, not even the most committed post-modern neo-marxist social justice warrior militant feminist I've ever met believes we'll ever reach a UTOPIA, so Peterson can put up and knock down all the straw men he wants, it means nothing to those who haven't imbibed his kool-aid.
With a television you don't have to be supernatural. God prefer that because it's more social but we have to use it correctly. Right now we have anarchy blindness. Despite the anarchy blindness I figured it out. That proves we can be God like. Only a person getting crucified would suspect something greater. They crucified me with exact same disease that in pink Floyd the wall. Victor said it's all good. It should be possible to make everything all good.
A spy classified at birth is YouTube song like a G6. The antichrist is a powerless spy and not a world leader. Their is no chance their horrible prophecy will happen. It's already too late for that.:-|