Parable from the Underground: An Argument Against Rationalism by David House

On the surface, Fyodor Dostoevskys story Notes from the Underground appears

to be nothing more than a meandering diatribe that touches briey on the topics of free will and self-destruction. The narrator of the story, Underground Man, is presented as just that: a mere man, grappling with his own insecurities and shortcomings. But if one were to examine further, one would nd that Underground Man is not a man at all, but a parable: a symbol through which Dostoevsky dissents against the idea of rationalism. By exposing Underground Man to the same axioms that are fundamental to a rationalist society, Dostoevsky allows us to view, via a microcosm of one man, the negative effects that rationalism has on society as a whole.

In order to understand how Dostoevsky uses the Underground Man as a

microcosm for rationalism, it is necessary to rst dene two assumed axioms of 19th century rationalism: that of alienation, and that of egotism. The most obvious of the two, egotism, was introduced into Russian culture by the rationalist N. G. Chernyshevsky in 1863, shortly before Dostoevskys writing of Notes from the Underground. Chernyshevsky proclaimed that if a man were to follow his own desires, he would incidentally make others around him happy (Chernyshevsky). This idea of extreme egotism seems to conict with the second axiom, alienation. Alienation arises as the result of a completely rationalized society, one in which the laws of nature threaten to

control so completely that soon one will be able to desire nothing but by the calendar (Dostoevsky 73). Alienation and egotism are inherent to a rationalist society, and so Dostoevsky uses these two concepts as the basis for the interpretation of Underground Man.

At rst glance, there is one glaring parallel between Underground Mans

egotistical attitude and the attitude that a rational society holds: both believe themselves to be more conscious than the rest of humanity. This is evidenced in Underground Mans own words: For man's everyday needs, it would have been quite enough to have the ordinary human consciousness, that is, half or a quarter of the amount which falls to the lot of a cultivated man of our unhappy nineteenth century, especially one who has the fatal ill-luck to inhabit Petersburg, the most theoretical and intentional town on the whole terrestrial globe. (53)

A relationship is also apparent between Underground Mans personal alienation

and the alienation present in a rational society. The loneliness that Underground Man feels is the result of his own egotism, just as the alienation within a rational society is the result of the societys own obsession with the self:

The worst of it is, look at it which way one will, it still turns out that I was always the most to blame in everything. And what is most humiliating of all, to blame for no fault of my own but, so to say, through the laws of nature. In the rst place, to blame because I am cleverer than any of the people surrounding me. (55)

Here again, we see strong parallels between Underground Man and society: the

egotism and alienation that he grapples with are equatable to the axioms present in 19th century rationalism. From this relationship, we can begin to explore the development and ultimate downfall of a rational society as mimicked through the mind of Underground Man.

When applied to Underground Man, the egotism/alienation duality of rationalism

seems to produce elements of masochism within Underground Mans own personality. He believes that masochism is the only pleasure which a conscious person may enjoy:

But it is just in that cold, abominable half despair, half belief, in that conscious burying oneself alive for grief in the underworld for forty years, in that acutely recognized and yet partly doubtful hopelessness of one's position, in that hell of unsatised desires turned inward, in that fever of oscillations, of resolutions determined for ever and repented of again a

minute later -- that the savour of that strange enjoyment of which I have spoken lies. (58)

The masochistic mindset that Underground Man develops is not representative of

a rational society as a whole, but rather explains the individual rebellions that take place within a rationalist society. This masochistic attitude is bolstered by Underground Mans sense of free will, which he says will allow for self-degradation in order to prove ones autonomy: It is just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly that he will desire to retain, simply in order to prove to himself -- as though that were so necessary -- that men still are men and not the keys of a piano, which the laws of nature threaten to control so completely that soon one will be able to desire nothing but by the calendar. (73)

There is a subtle irony in Underground Mans words, for even though he speaks

about free will, he is shown to be truly incapable of changing his own behavior throughout the course of the story. It is likely that Dostoevsky is only using Underground Man to explicate his own observations on free wills role in rationalism; however, we must assume that Underground Man honestly believes in his ability to change, but is ultimately led to inertness by way of his own egotism.

Underground Mans inertness can be seen both as a necessary product of

alienation and egotism, and also as a critique of the rationalist mindset of selfpreservation. First, consider the motivations of Underground Mans inertness: he is driven to inaction through an over-conscious nature, which is the result of his own perceived mental superiority. He is able to endure prolonged inaction through his masochistic tendencies, referring to his inertness as exalted suffering (133). Thus, it is by way of the alienation/egotism duality that Underground Man ultimately develops his inertness: To begin to act, you know, you must rst have your mind completely at ease and no trace of doubt left in it. Why, how am I, for example to set my mind at rest? Where are the primary causes on which I am to build? Where are my foundations? Where am I to get them from? (62)

The preceding passage also highlights Dostoevskys critique of rationalism

through inertness. In the passage, Dostoevsky points out a basic aw of rationalism with regards to self-preservation: if man is to act based solely on his own desires, on what is he to base his desires? Underground Mans poignant question Where are my foundations? Where am I to get them from? (62) brilliantly relates to the reader the fact that rationalism, when implemented in society, has unforeseen consequences that ultimately take personal meaning and direction from society as a whole.

The alienation/egotism duality of Underground Mans existence ultimately leads

to Underground Mans self-loathing and extreme personal insecurities. It is during the later chapters that Underground Man begins to project an image of himself upon the world -- a trait not exclusive to Underground Man, but one that is indeed found in the behavior of every society on earth. As Underground Man loses his grip on reality and his existence spins wildly out of control, Dostoevskys point on rationalism is vindicated in full: rationalism can lead only to ordered chaos, the complexities of which threaten to devastate any society that undertakes it. Through microcosm, Dostoevsky effectively sounds the warning bell against the malevolent nature and destructive force of fundamental rationalism.

Works Cited Dostoevsky, Fyodor . Notes from the Underground. trans Constance Garnett. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1918. Chernyshevsky, N.G. What Is to Be Done?. trans. Michael R. Katz. Ithaca: 1989.