The Spectrum of Philosophy In My Eyes (Dostesvksy Part 1)

Unlike Kafka, (who's life was summarised as being lonely due to feeling like the worst person in the world and suffocation fuelled by self awareness) Dostoevsky was lonely due to a supposed 'superiority complex' and suffered to the point of self destruction. I must say, I disagree with such opinions in Fyodor's case. In his work, he is known for exploring the human condition and its absurdness, in fact, many of his characters lack subtlety when it comes to their flaws (For example, Varvara Petrovna struggled with her desires, Sonia Marmeladova struggled with her faith due to the reality of poverty, and Raskolnikov struggled with guilt and consequences from his actions.) This, i believe could have been an unconscious reflection of his own flaws and insecurities. His characters that suffered from complexities such as addiction and depression could have been parallel to his own emotions and experiences, using them as a vessel to explore his inner self. I don't believe he thought he had any hierarchy over people, but instead, just struggled to agree that any form of action was good action outside of his eastern orthodoxy views. During his life, Russia was going through a rough time and many people say he was in favour of theocracy in the country. Again i object, but not entirely. His opinion on theocracy was complex and nuanced. Although, yes, he was a devout christian, he didn't agree with religion being forced on a society. In 'The Brothers Karamazov' the main character, Alexey, (also said to be a portrait of Dostoevsky himself) argues with his brother, Ivan, about atheism and the position of religion in the government. Ivan advocated for atheism while Alexey defended religion, but not as a replacement for reason or ethics. He explained that it could cause unnecessary divisions, conflicts and danger for both the church and state. He heavily implied that politics and religion should be kept separate and so i believe his opinion on theocracy was more negative than positive. Opposing this, he would also go on to believe everything happening was God's will to be so, and trying to change the state of the world with systems such as communism or socialism (which he openly hated) would be blasphemy. He presented an extreme critique on socialist and revolutionary movements, portraying communism as a violent and destructive agent of social change. He also believed, if enforced, would lead to the downfall of society and the loss of individual freedom, creating a dystopian future. Although his orthodoxy was more important than politics to him, he did often express his disappointment with the current political movements and gave his ideas on, not WHAT to do, but what WE ARE. Ultimately, he was a religious conservative who wanted people to understand that man was created in the image of god, and that you should think wisely before joining any political side.  So for him, strong and independent in his own beliefs, maybe. A superiority complex? Not at all.