Crime and Punishment......

[Lehn]

[quote="While talking about Rodya's article in Petrovich's flat"]“… But what is really original in all of this, and is exclusively your own, to my horror is that you sanction bloodshed in the name of conscience, and, it is the point of your article. But that sanction of bloodshed by conscience is, to my mind… more terrible than the official, legal sanction of bloodshed…â€

[shooraijin]

Wow, this is a heavy one. Couldn't you have found an easier essay to write?

Reminder as with all philosophical and ethical topics: civil responses mean continued discussion; wrangling and discord gets a padlock.

[Jasdero]

................ sure .................

[Omega Amen]

Now, getting back to the quote, I'm thinking that it means that as long as he, the IM, believes that he has the right to go as far as killing someone because in his (the IM’s) mind, it’s right/justifble………?

Right?

I have not read Crime and Punishment (I hope to someday), nor have I read the works by those philosophers, but if you want an interpretation of the quote you posted, then I believe you are very close (if not already got it).

From what I see in that quote, bloodshed is allowed/encouraged ("sanctioned") if it is the verdict of a moral/ethical judgement ("by conscience"). Now I do not know if it has to be a specific person's conscience. The quote only mentions "in the name of conscience" or "by conscience." So, if we only look at that quote, society's conscience or the conscience as dictated by absolute rules can also apply, not just the Incredible Man's.

One could argue that Hegel's rationale, as you summarized, falls within the definition of bloodshed justification in that quote. Hegel is citing the utilitarian rationale, meaning that the correct moral judgement or correct conscience is to do the greater good for the world or the ends justify the means.

That is the way I see it, from what limited knowledge I have about the situation you have presented.

[Hari]

According to the quote, it's even worse to be a pathological killer (one whose conscience does not object to murder) than, say, a reluctant member of a ruthless military faction (the latter being allowed by the government to murder).

Raskolnikov is without conscience, that is why his character is so notable in literature... AP Lit, hm?

I read C/P during my lunch breaks when I worked at a grocery store last year. It was a great read, and the looks on the managers' faces were great perks.

Hope I helped, good luck on the paper!