도스토예프스키의 『죄와 벌』에 나타난 정의와 고통의 문제 연구
A Study on Suffering and Justice in Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this paper is to examine the problems of suffering and justice of the characters in Dostoevsky's novel 『Crime and Punishment』. Justice is an existential problem of human beings and a core value underlying social formation. It is justice not to turn away from those who suffer, and in the process, humans take care of themselves, others, and society. Raskol’nikov considers his own suffering (the suffering of a Übermensch) to be a useful suffering for justice. That is, he believed in the utility theory of pain. But suffering is not a means to dominate others or to gain power. Suffering cannot in itself be a means to an end. But every suffering can have a meaning. That life, including meaningless suffering, can be meaningful gives us a reason to endure even meaningless suffering. In other words, the meaninglessness of suffering does not make life meaningless, but it makes even the meaningless pain of life a reason to endure. Raskol’nikov longs for pain to achieve justice, but he cannot bear the suffering of reality. So he tries to avoid the suffering. What is important to him is perhaps the universal suffering of mankind, not the suffering of me and those around me, as evidence of an unjust society. So he regards Sonya's suffering as the suffering of mankind and bows down in front of it. However, Sonya calls herself a great sinner and humbly embraces the suffering of others (his family and Raskol’nikov). Sonya, who humbly practices love, shows what transcendent justice is. Transcendental justice transcends theory, logic, and perception, and begins with the idea that everyone is a sinner for everyone (Sonya calls herself a great sinner) and embracing others.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine the problems of suffering and justice of the characters in Dostoevsky's novel 『Crime and Punishment』. Justice is an existential problem of human beings and a core value underlying social formation. It is justice not to turn away from those who suffer, and in the process, humans take care of themselves, others, and society. Raskol’nikov considers his own suffering (the suffering of a Übermensch) to be a useful suffering for justice. That is, he believed in the utility theory of pain. But suffering is not a means to dominate others or to gain power. Suffering cannot in itself be a means to an end. But every suffering can have a meaning. That life, including meaningless suffering, can be meaningful gives us a reason to endure even meaningless suffering. In other words, the meaninglessness of suffering does not make life meaningless, but it makes even the meaningless pain of life a reason to endure. Raskol’nikov longs for pain to achieve justice, but he cannot bear the suffering of reality. So he tries to avoid the suffering. What is important to him is perhaps the universal suffering of mankind, not the suffering of me and those around me, as evidence of an unjust society. So he regards Sonya's suffering as the suffering of mankind and bows down in front of it. However, Sonya calls herself a great sinner and humbly embraces the suffering of others (his family and Raskol’nikov). Sonya, who humbly practices love, shows what transcendent justice is. Transcendental justice transcends theory, logic, and perception, and begins with the idea that everyone is a sinner for everyone (Sonya calls herself a great sinner) and embracing others.
참고문헌 (35)
- 권철근, "『죄와 벌』의 고통론: 라스콜리니코프의 ‘죄’와‘벌’", 노어노문학, 3(2), pp.281~301 (2001)
- 권철근, "『죄와 벌』의 스비드리가일로프： 라스콜리니코프의 두 얼굴", 슬라브硏究, 25(2), pp.213~242 (2009), 러시아연구소[DOI]
- 김민아, "인간 존재에 대한 물음으로서의 <죄와 벌>", 노어노문학, 28(3), pp.59~90 (2016), 한국노어노문학회
- 김성일, "도스토옙스키『죄와 벌』에 나타난 ‘죄’와 ‘벌’의 의미", 동서인문, (11), pp.5~41 (2019), 인문학술원[DOI]
- 김종민, "벌할 수 없는 죄: 무의식의 코드를 통해 본 『죄와 벌』", 러시아어문학연구논집, (34), pp.7~49 (2010), 한국러시아문학회[DOI]
- 모출스키, "도스토예프스키2" (2001), 책세상
- 박은정, "정의론의 인간학적 기초", 사회과학논집, 3, pp.45~46 (1983)
- 석영중, "도스토예프스키의 <죄와 벌> - 성서와 신문에 관한 고찰", 노어노문학, 16(2), pp.155~177 (2004), 한국노어노문학회
- 석영중, "인간 만세!" (2018), 세창출판사
- 손봉호, "고통받는 인간" (1995), 서울대출판부
- 유호종, "고통의 관찰 가능한 의미와 초월적 의미", 대동철학, (26), pp.131~148 (2004), 대동철학회
- 조유선, "톨스토이와 도스토예프스키: 인간 고통의 두 양상", 러시아어문학연구논집, (36), pp.149~174 (2011), 한국러시아문학회[DOI]
- 조주관, "죄와 벌의 현대적 해석" (2008), 연세대 출판부
- 조혜경, "도스또옙스끼의 종교철학에 나타난 러시아 분리파의 문제 연구: 『죄와 벌』을 중심으로", 러시아어문학연구논집, (32), pp.117~139 (2009), 한국러시아문학회[DOI]
- 조혜경, "기억의 에토스: 『죄와 벌』의 주인공을 중심으로", 노어노문학, 32(2), pp.61~82 (2020), 한국노어노문학회
- 하재홍, "다시 한 번, 정의란 무엇인가? - 켈젠의 정의론에 대한 검토", 서울대학교 법학, 57(3), pp.1~72 (2016), 법학연구소
- 허선화, "<죄와 벌>에 나타난 자기 인식의 패러다임으로서의 자기비하", 노어노문학, 19(1), pp.313~346 (2007), 한국노어노문학회
- 홍사현, "개체의 큰 행복: 행복에 대한 니체의 가치 전환", 철학논집, 50, pp.201~235 (2017), 철학연구소[DOI]
- Ветловская И. Е., "Достоевский иМатериалы и Иссдедования", pp.78~98 (1996), Дмитрий Буланин
- Достоевский ф. М., "Полн собр. соч. в 30 т. Т. 6" (1973), Наука
- Касаткина Т. А., "Достоевский и Материалы иИссдедования", pp.81~88 (1994), Наука
- Кацман Роман, "Достоевский и мировая культура", pp.165~176 (1999), Классика плюс
- Кирпотин В. Я., "Избр. работы. в 3 т. Т. 3", pp.7~288 (1978), худ. лит-ра
- Новикова Елена, "Достоевский и мироваякультура", pp.89~98 (1999), Классика плюс
- Belliotti R. A., "Dostoevsky’s Legal and Moral Philosophy", pp.196~198 (2016), Brill
- Friesen L. G., "Transcendent Love", pp.171~185 (2017), Notre Dame UP
- Habib Khalil M., "Dostoevsky’s Political Thought", pp.141~157 (2013), Lexington Books
- Ivanits Linda, "Dostoevsky and the Russian People", pp.45~76 (2008), Cambridge UP
- Knapp Liza, "The Annihilation of Inertia" (1996), Northwestern UP
- Mochulsky K., "Dostoevsky - His Life and Work" (1967), Princeton UP
- Paris Bernard J., "Dostoevsky’s Great Characters", pp.95~114 (2008), Palgrave Macmillan
- Panichas George A., "Dostoevsky’s Spiritual Art" (1983)
- Russell Henry M. W., "Dostoevsky and Christian Tradition" (2008), Cambridge UP
- Waite Geoff, "Neitzsche and Dostoevsky: Philosophy, Morality, Tragedy", pp.3~36 (2016), Northwestern UP
- Wolf Peter M., "Dostoevsky’s Conception of Man: Its Impact on Philosophical Anthropology", pp.175~214 (1997), Pennsylvania UP