When you feed them they become obedient and give their freedom. He argues with Christ as to why he didn’t turn stones into bread because he considers mankind like sheep or other animals. In the Grand Inquisitor ‘s point of view, suffering is in freedom and he believes whoever offers men freedom, he gives them nothing more than pain and misery. The Grand Inquisitor disagrees with Christ’s giving men freedom because he says “for nothing ever been more insufferable for men and for human society than freedom” (252).
He says, “I swear man is created weaker and baser than you thought him” (256), thereby considers human beings frailer than we imagine, While reading through Brother Karamazov’s of the Grand Inquisitor we can find adjectives like: feeble, ignorant, weak, depraved, nonentities, rebels …etc, which refers to Grand Inquisitor’s attitude about human nature, he argues that human beings are rebels and “rebels can’t be happy”. The Grand inquisitor misjudges human nature and their capability, but his ideas that human beings cannot tolerate freedom could be acceptable and satisfactory.Īccording to the Grand Inquisitor, human beings are feeble and are not capable of doing anything. He plays an important role in the Brother Karamazov’s novel, which has a whole chapter about him and his ideas about men.
The Grand Inquisitor thinks so low of human nature and he believes that men as whole are incapable creatures and he has doubt about human’s capability. The Grand Inquisitor is a significant part of the Brothers Karamazov’s novel and one of the well known passages in modern writing because of its concepts about human nature and freedom.
What is the human nature like according to Grand inquisitor’s analysis? Why does he have such opinion? What do you think about the human nature? Explain whether we can accept or reject his views.
0 kommentar(er)
