Written
as a 2-hour paper for Humanities 402 on 14 April 2015. I have corrected typos in the
original. The first three paragraphs make simple observations on the role of love, especially eros, in the novel, the fourth paragraph restates Zosima's ethical teaching regarding human love, and the final paragraph makes a genuinely philosophical contribution in the relationship between reason and emotion.
Different kinds of love recur
frequently throughout The Brothers Karamazov. A very common love is romantic
love, a love that seems to affect the plot itself, or to at least add intrigue
and layering to character interaction.
Dimitri and his father Fyodor both
fall in love with Grushenka. Both men seem not so much to want to love her and
give their lives to her service so much as to defeat the other in competition
and possess her as the object of their eros.
Later, after his father is
murdered, Dimitri tries to gain the hand of his beloved. He finds out that she
is involved with a Polish officer and is heartily disheartened. In the course
of the evening, however, the Polish chap proves himself to be far more
possessive than Dimitri ever was; it can be doubted whether the Polish man ever
loved Grushenka, since he does not seem to care for her subtle feelings and
openly insults Russia. At this point Dimitri proves that he does love her,
truly, and that he wants what is best for her. It should be noted that he
definitely thinks that what is best for her is to marry him, it still seems
primarily motivated by true eros and
not a perversion of erotic love.
Zosima exhorts his brethren to love
everything, the trees, leaves, children, animals—everything. He teaches that
everyone can love occasionally, even evil people. This statement seems
surprising at first, but Jesus confirms this by saying ‘if you who are evil
know how to do good to your children, how much more will you Heavenly Father
take care of you?’. God loves all things all the time, since God is Love. Human
persons, however, have trouble loving all the time. Zosima, therefore, urges
his followers—and us—to strive to love all things at all times, since if all
our energy is being spent on love than none can be spent on hatred.
The narrator provides a curious
reference to love in the context of people jeering at Zosima and Alyosha’s
reaction. Alyosha even questions why God has not vindicated his humble servant
and made the holiness of Zosima apparent to all. The narrator recounts that he
is glad that love gains the upper hand over reason in this instance, since a
reasonable man will always come back to reason, but there are times when love
must overrule reason. The narrator seems to create a divide between love and
reason, at least certain types of love and reason. For Christians this is
impossible in the strict sense, since God is Love and God is Logos. However, in
a more general way, could this be possible? What does this divide mean? I think
the narrator—and maybe the ‘author’—is trying to show us the limits of the
“narrow Euclidian mind” that he wrote about. There are times when a certain
kind of reasoning, formed by the strict application of logic to actions and
events without any consultation, advice, or influence of emotions, is
inappropriate. There are certain times when feelings trump reasonings. This is
what Dostoevsky is showing us, that mere reason, reductionistic reason, Enlightenment reason is not the absolute
indicator of propriety vis-à-vis
reality. The emotions—strictly speaking ‘non-rational’ in themselves—must be
consulted in making rational judgments and in taking action. Dostoevsky does
not place a strict dichotomy between reason and love. He shows that love, not
merely an emotion but certainly with emotional power, can sometimes overrule
the “narrow Euclidian mind”. Sometimes it should. Sometimes it must.
