Crime And Punishment - Suffering Essays - English-language Films

Crime and Punishment - Suffering In the novel Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky, suffering is an integral part of every characters role. However, the message that Dostoevsky wants to present with the main character, Raskolnikov, is not one of the Christian idea of salvation through suffering. Rather, it appears to me, as if the author never lets his main character suffer mentally throughout the novel, in relation to the crime, that is. His only pain seems to be physical sicknes. Raskolnikov commits a premeditated murder in a state of delirium. He ends up committing a second murder, which he never ever wanted to be responsible for. He kills Lizaveta, an exceedingly innocent person. But does the author ever remind us of the murder at any time in the novel again? Not in the physical sense of the crime itself. The reader doesnt hear about how heavily the murders are weighing on his heart, or how he is tormented by visions of the crime. He doesnt feel the least bit guilty about having committed the crime, only his prides hurt. He doesnt mention the idea of the pain that might arise from recurrent visions of the crime. Raskolnikov never again recalls the massive amounts of blood everywhere, the look on Lizavetas face when he brings down the axe on her head. These things clearly show that the crime isnt what might cause him suffering, or pain, it is something else. After Raskolnikov is sent off to Siberia, he doesnt feel remorseful. His feelings havent changed about his crime, he feels bad at not being able to living up to his own ideas of greatness. He grows depressed only when he learns of his mothers death. Raskolnikov still hasnt found any reason to feel remorse for his crimes. He takes Siberia as his punishment, because of how annoying it is to go through all these formalities, and ridicularities that it entails. Yet, he actually feels more comfortable in Siberia than in his home in St. Petersburg. Its more comfortable, and has better living conditions than his own home. But he isnt free to do whatever he likes. But this does not contradict what Ive said before. He doesnt view Siberia as suffering, but he does view it as punishment, because he would rather not have to go through seven years in his prison cell. His theory of the extraordinary, and the ordinary is something he has to follow and adhere to . His necessity to suffer is a part of his necessity to fulfill his unknown criteria to be extraordinary. His suffering, if any, is purely superficial. The idea of suffering has to be heartfelt and well-specified. Raskolnikovs suffering is never spoken about, mainly because there is none. Even Raskolnikov views his turning himself in as a blunder, because he couldnt take the heat. It is obvious that Raskolnikov never seems to be in a pit of despair from all the suffering he has to face from the effect of the murder. One might argue that Raskolnikovs illnesses arise from his guilt and remorse for the crimes, but that doesnt appear possible. Since the character never cites the murder for his sickness. In fact, Raskolnikov fell immediately sick after committing the murder. How could he struck by guilt five seconds after committing the murder when he hasnt even had a chance to see what events have just occurred? There is not a single instance when Raskolnikov, or the author for that matter, ever cite the dramatic effect of the murders on Raskolnikovs conscience for his terrible illness. NOTHING in the novel would even imply that he feels remorse about committing the murders, it is just a silly idea that has been implanted in peoples minds and the seed has spread too rapidly, without analization.It is incredibly obvious that all the so-called pain and suffering that Raskolnikov feels is untrue, silly, and backed by no support. It would be incredulously moronic to attempt to view it from another point of understanding. People are entitled to their own opinions but the beliefs of the at error majority should not overbear the beliefs of the correct minority. Acceptance of a theory without analysis of it is ignorance.

Mao Ze Dong essays

Mao Ze Dong essays Chinese leadership worries concerning separatism are well founded. With China moving closer than ever to democracy these concerns are especially important. The regions that make up much of China do not seek widespread political independence, as their own freedom will come with time. An enormous and progressively growing country China is built up of many smaller entities. Many of these states were at one time under their own rule and willing to fight to regain their freedom. China has moved forward as a wealthy country and world power putting many of her problems in the past. As China grows ever stronger and more stable the idea that any of her provinces may regain independence is becoming less and less likely, however if Chinas principal government weakens as it transforms into a democratic country, this may provide the opportunity needed for these provinces to test independence. Tibetan Buddhists feel they have much in common with India, and their spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. In the early 7th century Tibet was an independent country. As the Tibetan empire fell into decline the Mongolians defeated it. After the fall of the Mongolians, China regained not only her independence but Tibet as well. Tibet had been under Chinese control for quite some time before trying to regain their independence. When Tibet actually sought regaining their independence, the Chinese government claimed it was too late. After Tibetan revolution, in which the Peoples Liberation Army prevailed, Tibet remained, and still does, under Chinese control. In 1995, Beijing officials decided not to accept the Tibetan Buddhists selection for a new Panchen Lama, the second most important spiritual leader in Tibet. Beijing instead installed its own leader. As can be imagined this action produced much anger amongst Tibetan people toward Chinese government. Denying Tibet a new spirit ual leader that would most likely raise the idea of...

The Minimum Wage Should Not Be Abolished Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The Minimum Wage Should Not Be Abolished - Essay Example This discussion examines the benefits of raising the minimum wage not only for those workers who would gain monetarily but to employers as well and ultimately, the economy as a whole. Currently, the minimum wage stands at $7.25 which was increased from $5.85 per hour in July of 2009. This modest increase put minimum wage earners near the poverty line, about $16,000 for a family of three (Poverty Guidelines, 2006). The minimum wage had not been raised for seven years previous, the longest time span since the law first went into effect in 1938. This decline in the real value of the minimum wage over that seven years translated into lower real wages for millions of workers and contributed to the income gap between poor working families and the middle class. Raising the minimum wage allows those who make minimum salaries to keep up with inflation. It also helps those that need it the most such as single mothers and minorities. In addition, it will cause a ‘ripple effect’ in that wages will also increase for those that make just above the minimum. In 1968, a full-time employee who earned the minimum wage made what would be â€Å"the equivalent of $15,431 today, 44 percent more than today’s full-time minimum wage worker† (Lee, 1999, p. 1016). ... decreased by 20 percent since September 1997.   â€Å"The minimum wage still equals only 31 percent of the average wage for private sector, non-supervisory workers†¦ the lowest share since at least the end of World War II† (Bernstein & Shapiro, 2006). Some of those who oppose the increase have suggested that the dominant wage earner of families does not fall into the minimum wage category, that it normally applies to teenage summer workers. This assertion is not at all the case. The Economic Report of the President evaluated the evidence in 1999 and found that that this argument was indeed untrue stating in its report, â€Å"most minimum wage workers are adults from lower income families, and their wages are a major source of their families’ earnings† (Council of Economic Advisors, 1999, p. 111). Opponents also argue that raising the minimum wage will hurt the economy but, unlike the effects tax-cuts for the wealthiest Americans have on the economy, when t he poorest in society have extra income; they spend it on the necessities of life thus directly stimulating the local economy. Employers generally oppose increasing the minimum wage. Their claim is that they would be forced to lay-off employees to cover the extra costs. This claim, however, has been proven to be unfounded. On the front-end, employers may indeed pay more to their employees after a wage increase but, as evidence indicates, the increased costs to employers are usually compensated for by benefits. For example, employees who make a wage that allows their families to subsist, rather than not, are less likely to secure other employment which reduces the employer’s employee turnover rate thus reducing additional training and recruitment costs. It also results in a decrease in absenteeism as well as higher