The End

After finishing the novel, I feel relieved and a bit wary. I'm relieved that I finished the book (partly because I now have the ability to tell people that I read a book by Dostoevsky), but I'm also wary of the message it sends. Should I follow Dostoevsky's beliefs by not following anything (holy paradox, Batman!), or just take it as a nutjob's ramblings? Overall, I believe that any side to "the answer" of the meaning of life and what we should do with ourselves is a valid point, and that Dostoevsky's word is better than none. So, I did enjoy reading the book and I do think that it was worth it. As far as the effect it had on me, call me in twenty years.

Dostoevsky attempts to shatter our beliefs in the same way that science (and Darwin) did to religion. It's scary to think that all of these "beliefs" are just that, and nothing more. I would like to believe that we evolved from apes, as it seems logical. But what truth does logic have when we base it on things that aren't observable, such as things too far for us to reach or things that happened centuries before?

Gentlemen, you will say that it had a profound effect on my train of thought. You will say that it has changed me. Well, let me make myself clear; it won't change how I live from day-to-day. I'll still strive to be the best that I can, on all fronts (politically, socially, economically, intellectually, athletically, etc.). However, when presented with the idea, the notion that true logic, science is a lie, can we logically take it with a grain of sand and just move on?

If Dostoevsky had brought the idea that God was a myth in the same way that we feel about Zeus, Apollo, Hades, and so on, I would have accepted it. I believe that religion is a great way to give hope to the hopeless. However, I do not believe in religion myself. Does a higher being exist? In my opinion, no. Physically, no "higher being" can exist somewhere in the clouds. But can I be sure that such a being doesn't exist?

Long story short, I enjoyed the book for the logic of a lack of logic it brings. That is, I enjoyed that it tried to take up the roots of science and religion, because we do need a form of a restraint as to science. I want to find out a lot of answers to a lot of questions. But on the other hand, what would happen to spontaneity? To the random? I don't want to be a case of twice two makes four. Every now and then, don't we all want to be a case of twice two makes ten?