Nietzsche, Dostoevsky, and The Brothers Karamazov | Jordan B Peterson

I just told my parents that I've finally finished The Brothers Karamazov and this pops out in my feed. Thanks YouTube for always listening to my conversations

Reading Brothers Karamazov right now and the book is unputdownable. Very well written and the author shows the complexity of the characters and their several layers of depth with ease.

Its incredible how in every JBP video he says things so simply which I have been trying to articulate to myself - "its not what you believe as if its a set of facts but how you conduct yourself in the world." I imagine many of his viewers in their quarter-life crisis feel the same. You can learn as much as you want and feel like you can rationalise things better than most other people around you, but that means fuck all if you aren't doing things and producing. You won't be any happier either.

Also, the passage with Ivan confronting satan during his psychosis is probably my favorite thing that I’ve ever read

Finished the Brothers Karamazov recently. Fantastic book! Some of the most profound and moving monologues I've ever read. I read Crime and Punishment some time before that. Mind blowing!! He makes you feel like you are the main character.

Edit: hi, this comment still gets a bit of traction but frankly it's been a long time. I've changed my mind on a lot of the things I said in the original comment and frankly... I just don't remember the video, my comment, or the book itself to really go debating anyone anymore haha. It was an interesting discussion and I'm glad I made the comment, but tbh Dostoevsky doesn't mean as much to me anymore, and my opinion of Jordan Peterson is nowhere near as high as it was when I first made this comment :) This will be a long comment. I really like Jordan Peterson, but I found his description of the Brothers Karamazov to be very misleading. I am going to give three innacuracies of his (just under half of the comment) and then describe the plot and themes myself. Before I begin I'd like to say that I have been getting replies to this comment for years. It is far from a perfect comment and there were plenty of times when I miscommunicated. I found this comment so hard to word because I was mostly disagreeing with how Peterson flavoured certain parts of the book. It felt like he added his own personal spin that wasnt inted by the author. That being said, most of what he said was technically correct, so I found it hard to express my problems with a lot of his claims. Firstly, Ivan isn't a soldier, this doesn't really matter in the scheme of things, but I think it's important to bring up as he seems to be confusing two of the main characters, that being Ivan and Dmitri. Secondly he puts far too much emphasis on Alyoshas and Ivan's relationship. He claims that Ivan is "constantly attacking" Alyosha's beliefs, but this simply isn't true. It's clear that he is thinking of two chapters called "Rebellion" and "The Grand Inquisitor" when he says this. The problem is that Ivan's "attacks" are nowhere near constant and are only seen in these chapters. This was my main problem with his portrayl, the word "constant". It implies that this is the plot when it really isn't, as I will show in my last four paragraphs. Another important details is that Ivan isn't attacking Alyosha , he is trying to communicate his spiritual pain to him. He does criticise the viewpoint that people like Alyosha have, but it's not done maliciously or to "knock him off of his pedestal" as Peterson puts it. Again, I'm wondering if he's confusing Ivan with another character (in this case it would be a socialist type called Rakitin). The conversation that Ivan and Alyosha have, was really about how Ivan can't believe in God. Ivan even says that if God existed, Ivan would "give back his ticket to heaven" because he couldn't accept the suffering of the world, no matter what "Divine Plan" there was to explain it. Ivan claims to be an atheist and claims to believe that there is no such thing as morality and one is able to do anything. I have only read two of Dostoevsky's books, but atheism leading to sin, seems to be a frequent theme. As Peterson frequently points out, Dostoevsky almost exactly predicted the Communist society before it was invented. Moving back to my point, it is clear that he does not really believe this and he spends the novel torturing himself over this conflict within himself, especially when he sees another person who truly believes what Ivan claimed to. Peterson was very correct when he said that Dostoevsky personifies differing philosiphies and ideas, using his characters. I believe that Peterson has confused these elements of the story because he is thinking of the themes of the book as a whole. Becuase of this he has combined the characters and plot points that form these themes over time. He has read 100s of books, there's no reason to expect him to remember them all perfectly. Now I will describe the plot of the book in my own words. The first half of the book is about a family conflict, between two characters: Fyodor Pavlovitch Karamazov (A hedonistic father who abandoned his children) and Dmitri Fyodorovitch Karamazov (Fyodor's extremely passionate son, who is an honorable man, but a complete scoundrel. I don't know how to properly describe him, so i will use two quotes from the book. Dmitri holds the ideals of the Madonna and the ideals of Sodom at the same time. He describes his mind as the battlefield of God and Satan. He is honorable, intelligent and compassionate but also revels in depravity. The paradoxs within Dmitri, Ivan and Fyodor are all key to the story and described as part of the "Karamazov" way of life. The conflict between the two is over the inheritence Fyodor owes Dmitri and more importantly, over a beautiful woman called Grushenka, who is twisted, spiteful and depraved, but only for the pain she has suffered in the past. The second half of the book is hard to talk about without spoilers. That being said, this "spoiler" was in the first sentance of the blurb of my copy of the book. If you don't want to hear it, don't read this paragraph. *************************Spoilers***********************. Fyodor Pavlovitch Karamazov is murdered and Dmitri is accused of the crime. The second half of the book consists of the events on the night of the crime as well as the investigation that follows. Now that I am done describing the plot, I have to emphasise that the book is really about the personalites and philosophies of the characters. The plot merely serves as a medium to explore that. The book also has themes of belief and morality, but not to the extent that Peterson described. I don't know how to end this. Sorry if this was overly long or had unnecesary information. I finished the book today and writing this helped me sift through my thoughts. I really like Jordan Peterson and think that he's extremely intelligent and wise. I believe that this clip was taken from his Biblical series, a series that still blows me away every time I think about it. It is one of the most insightful things that I have ever heard.

I finished reading The Brothers Karamazov today, and wow what an incredible book. Glad I saw it on Dr. Peterson’s list

I noticed the same thing .. after reading Nietzsche and Dostoevsky for the first time... Quite amazing .. Even the occurrence of someone beating a horse.. I read Nietzsche had a nervous breakdown near the end of his sanity.. The breakdown occurred when he saw a man mercilessly beating a horse .. he went to the horse put his arm around the neck hugging him and crying.. then I read in Dostoevsky a dream that the main character in Crime and Punishment has.. he dreams he is with his father as a child.. and these people are making fun while a man beats his horse.. it is a nightmare .. in a nightmare for the child

It is interesting how you see this exact sentiment of "just doing" "go for it" "being a good person is just a habit" in 'lower' social circles, almost as if they're trying to put their fingers on precisely this without fully expanding on it.

Thank you for popularizing Dostoevsky's work in English

Best novel ever written and Peterson does a good job in this lecture segment of explaining its relevancy, at least in a brief summary kind of way.

I have been deeply impressed by Dostoyevsky's works since my youth, 25 yrs back. He is so rarely read that I had to keep all my appreciation to myself. Very rarely got to discuss it with friends. I came across Jordon Peterson's references to Dostoyevsky's work, couple of months back, and that was a huge HI FIVE moment. At last, someone giving the writer his due appreciation. It lead me to hearing Peterson's views on other matters, and it was a relief to hear what he has to say, most of the time. Over the years, by observing the activities on university campuses and the media, I had come to the conclusion that sanity can only be found by retreating deep within ones self, and that no meaningful conversation is possible with the outside world...I have experienced the genuine problems of being a woman, and care for the redressal of the prejudices and oppressions that exist in my country, but I do not see the trenchant tyranny of the left as any sincere solution to anything. I have even heard Noam Chaomsky conclude that the left phenomenon is self serving.

This part reminds me of: "You must make it your habit to speak and act like people who are going to be judged by the law of liberty ....What good does it do, my brothers, if someone claims to have faith but does not prove it with actions? This kind of faith cannot save him, can it? .... Faith by itself, if it does not prove itself with actions, is dead." - James 2.

This review is very inquisitive. ❤️

Ivan wasn’t necessarily more intelligent than aloysha just more educated. Aloysha was half educated but chose to quit his education to follow the monastic path which he later gives up from his favorite priests recommendation. Aloysha was astonishing good at reading people

One of the greatest works ever written

The origin of Dostoyevsky's infamous God quote. "But what will become of men then? Without God and immortal life? All things are lawful then, they can do what they like?" Addressing Alyosha Karamazov, Mitya (Dmitri) Karamazov quotes himself saying this when retelling an earlier conversation with Rakitin, a journalist who dislikes God but won't preach it in his reviews. The idea comes from Ivan Karamazov.

I started The Brother Karamazov’s year ago and till now I’m trying not to finish that book . It’s something really deep that makes me feel that what I am and I don’t want it to be over so I didn’t finish it yet . 🏹

I have never enjoyed reading. I have never read a single book cover to cover. But I decided to listen to Dr. Peterson's "12 Rules for Life" and after hearing him discussing Dostoyevsky I decided to listen to "Crime and Punishment". This book is next on my list.

03:05 "It's not what you believe as if it is a set of facts, but how you conduct yourself in the world."