Comment on 2/12 Discussion

The discussion today finally got to the real meat of this book, this idea that normally people are supposed to act in their best interest or be good based on religion, yet there is this one advantage that is worth acting against these ideas to attain. According to religion, we should be noble and good at heart and, in Dostoyevsky’s opinion, religion says we should be nice and devoid of sin, yet people often break these laws, intentionally even though they are not supposed to. Then there is evolution, which says we are supposed to always act in our best interest and follow the laws of nature, yet there is this one thing that people do that always breaks these laws. I am not sure if Dostoyevsky is using this to question the validity of evolution and religion, or just to question the validity of the human society in general, but his point seems to make at least some sort of sense in that people often do act as he describes, yet the way he is arguing makes it seem that any attempt to find strong logic is illogical, yet he is trying to justify that point through logic.