Convicting Raskolnikov Dostoevskys Views On Criminal Justice Essays

Convicting Raskolnikov Dostoevsky's views on Criminal Justice At the close of Crime and Punishment, Raskolinkov is convicted of Murder and sentenced to seven years in Siberian prison. Yet even before the character was conceived, Fyodor Dostoevsky had already convicted Raskolinkov in his mind (Frank, Dostoevsky 101). Crime and Punishment is the final chapter in Dostoevsky's journey toward understanding the forces that drive man to sin, suffering, and grace. Using ideas developed in Notes from Underground and episodes of his life recorded in Memoirs of the House of the Dead, Dostoevsky puts forth in Crime in Punishment a stern defense of natural law and an irrefutable volume of evidence condemning Raskolnikov's actions (Bloom, Notes 25). Central to the prosecution of any crime, murder in particular, is the idea of motive. Not only must the prosecutor prove the actus rectus or "guilty act," but also that the criminal possessed the mens rea or "guilty mind" (Schmalleger 77). The pages of Crime and Punishment and the philosophies of Dostoevsky provide ample proof of both. The first is easy; Dostoevsky forces the reader to watch firsthand as Raskolnikov "took the axe all the way out, swung it with both hands, scarcely aware of himself, and almost without effort, almost mechanically, brought the butt-end down on her head" (Crime and Punishment 76). There is no doubt Raskolnikov caused the death of Alena Ivanovna and, later, Lizaveta, but whether he possessed the mens rea is another matter entirely. By emphasizing the depersonalization Raskolnikov experiences during the murder, the fact that he was "scarcely aware of himself" and acted "almost mechanically" the sympathetic reader might conclude that some unknown fo! rce of nature, and not the person Raskolnikov, is to blame for the death of the usurer and her sister (Nutall 160). Dostoevsky's answer to this is contained not in Crime and Punishment, but rather in an earlier work, Notes from Underground. The entire story of the Underground Man was intended to parody the works of Nicolai G. Chernyshevsky, and thereby prove that man's actions are the result of his own free-will. The idea that man is alone responsible for his actions is central to proving that Raskolnikov is really to blame for his crime. For under the Chernyshevsky-embraced doctrine of scientific determinism, Raskolnikov cannot be held accountable for his actions. Rather, scientific determinism holds that whatever actions men take are inevitable and unalterable because they are "totally determined by the laws of nature." The Underground man was created by Dostoevsky as a man who accepts without question scientific determinism--he is a projection of Chernyshevsky's theories at their most extreme. The result is not the utopian vision of Chernyshevsky, but rather an antisocial animal that is barely recognizable as human (Frank "Nihilism" 37). The reason, according to Dostoevsky, for the problems of the Underground Man, is that he is incapable of any moral action because he lives in a world devoid of blame. At one point, the Underground man imagines forgiving someone for having slapped him in the face; but he cannot. Although the human side of the Underground man realizes that it is moral to forgive, determinism convinces him that "the man who would have slapped my face would most probably have done it in obedience to the laws of nature" (Notes from Underground 45). And so he cannot blame the other for slapping him because nature is really to blame (Frank "Nihilism" 50). But, as the Underground Man points out "even if it is the law of nature, it hurts all the same." According to Dostoevsky, blame is central to humanity. We must accept the responsibility and the consequences of our actions, since we alone determine what they are (Frank "Nihilism" 56). So, Raskolnikov cannot blame fate for his misfortune. But what can! he blame? Why, then did Raskolnikov, a "handsome young man," well educated, devoted to his family, choose to kill a defenseless old woman? Like the main character of Notes from Underground, Raskolinkov finds himself torn between reason and objective morality (Jackson 150). In an essay written six months prior to the start of the novel entitled "On Crime" Raskolnikov lays down the foundation of his rational justification for murder. "On Crime" describes a world split into two groups of

Definition of American Lyceum Movement

Definition of American Lyceum Movement The American Lyceum Movement inspired a popular trend of adult education  in the 1800s as scholars, authors, and even local citizens, would give lectures to local chapters of the organization. Town lyceums became important gathering places for civically engaged Americans. Lyceum speakers came to include luminaries such as Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. A future president, Abraham Lincoln, gave his first public address at a Lyceum meeting in his adopted hometown of Springfield, Illinois, on a winter night in 1838. originated with Josiah Holbrook, a teacher and amateur scientist who became a passionate advocate for volunteer educational institutions in towns and villages. The name lyceum came from the Greek word for the public meeting space where Aristotle lectured. Holbrook began a lyceum in Millbury, Massachusetts in 1826. The organization would host educational lectures and programs, and with Holbrook’s encouragement the movement spread to other towns in New England. Within two years, approximately 100 lyceums had been started in New England and in the Middle Atlantic states. In 1829, Holbrook published a book, American Lyceum, which described his vision of a lyceum and gave practical advice for organizing and maintaining one. The opening of Holbrooks book stated: â€Å"A Town Lyceum is a voluntary association of individuals disposed to improve each other in useful knowledge, and to advance the interests of their schools. To gain the first object, they hold weekly or other stated meetings, for reading, conversation, discussion, illustrating the sciences, or other exercises designed for their mutual benefit; and, as it is found convenient, they collect a cabinet, consisting of apparatus for illustrating the sciences, books, minerals, plants, or other natural or artificial productions.† Holbrook listed some of the â€Å"advantages which have already arisen from the Lyceums,† which included: The improvement of conversation. Holbrook wrote: â€Å"Subjects of science, or other topics of useful knowledge, take the place of frivolous conversation, or petty scandal, frequently indulged, and uniformly deplored, in our country villages.†Directing amusements for children. In other words, providing activities that would be useful or educational.Calling into use neglected libraries. Holbrook noted that libraries in small communities often fell into disuse, and he believed the educational activity of a lyceum would encourage people to patronize libraries.Increasing the advantages, and raising the character of, district schools. At a time when public education was often haphazard and disorganized, Holbrook believed that community members involved in a lyceum would be a useful adjunct to local classrooms. In his book, Holbrook also advocated for a â€Å"National Society for the improvement of popular education.† In 1831 a National Lyceum organization was started and it specified a constitution for lyceums to follow. The Lyceum Movement Spread Widely Holbrook’s book and his ideas proved to be extremely popular. By the mid-1830s the Lyceum Movement had grown enormously. More than 3,000 lyceums were operating in the United States, a remarkable number considering the small size of the young nation. The most prominent lyceum was one organized in Boston, which was led by Daniel Webster, renowned lawyer, orator, and political figure. A particularly memorable lyceum was the one at Concord, Massachusetts, as it was regularly attended by authors Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. Both men were known to deliver addresses at the lyceum that would later be published as essays. For instance, the Thoreau essay later titled â€Å"Civil Disobedience† was presented in its earliest form as a lecture at the Concord Lyceum in January 1848. Lyceums Were Influential in American Life The lyceums scattered throughout the nation were gathering places of local leaders, and many political figures of the day got their start by addressing a local lyceum. Abraham Lincoln, at the age of 28, gave a speech to the lyceum in Springfield, Illinois in 1838, ten years before he would be elected to Congress and 22 years before he would be elected president. By speaking at the Lyceum, Lincoln followed a familiar path of other young aspiring politicians. The Lyceum Movement gave them a chance to gain some respect in their local communities, and helped lead the way toward political careers. And in addition to homegrown speakers, lyceums were also known to host prominent traveling speakers. The records of the Concord Lyceum indicate that visiting speakers included the newspaper editor Horace Greeley, the minister Henry Ward Beecher, and the abolitionist Wendell Phillips. Ralph Waldo Emerson was in demand as a lyceum speaker, and made a living traveling and giving lectures at lyceums. Attending lyceum programs were a very popular form in entertainment in many communities, especially during winter nights. The Lyceum Movement peaked in the years before the Civil War, though it did have a revival in the decades after the war. Later Lyceum speakers included the author Mark Twain, and the great showman Phineas T. Barnum, who would give lectures on temperance. Sources: Josiah Holbrook. Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed., vol. 7, Gale, 2004, pp. 450-451. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Ljungquist, Kent P. Lyceums.  American History Through Literature 1820-1870, edited by Janet Gabler-Hover and Robert Sattelmeyer, vol. 2, Charles Scribners Sons, 2006, pp. 691-695.  Gale Virtual Reference Library. Holbrook, J. Josiah Holbrooks Letter on the Farmers Lyceum.  American Eras: Primary Sources, edited by Sara Constantakis, et al., vol. 4: Reform Era and Eastern U.S. Development, 1815-1850, Gale, 2014, pp. 130-134.  Gale Virtual Reference Library.

Informed consent. The possible dangers of too much information Research Paper

Informed consent. The possible dangers of too much information conveyed - Research Paper Example rug. Moreover, there is an issue with how much comprehension a participant may have of the risks that are dictated in the informed consent protocol. Not surprisingly, the forms must be readable in order for a patient to truly have considered himself â€Å"informed,† and the most important part of readability is to put the risks into layman’s terms. Studies have suggested that esoteric forms which are more difficult to read than complicated texts results in considerably less informed consent than forms which are not so. Therefore, it is important to pay attention to the level of language used in the consent forms and keep the audience in mind. If the person drafting these forms keeps in mind this golden rule, then other studies suggest that informed consent is extremely effective. The possible dangers of too much information conveyed Loftus & Fries (2008) theorize that informed consent may do more harm than good, at least when the risks that are presented to the patient consist of all potential risks that might occur, no matter how remote. They argue that the patient might imagine that he or she is experiencing the symptom because of the power of the mind, in that the mind can play tricks on people, and, if the patient knows that a certain risk is possible, then the patient may conjure this risk even though it is only remotely possible that the patient is actually experiencing the symptom. As proof of this, they point to the power of the placebo (Loftus & Fries, 2008, p. 217). To them, a patient is better off just knowing the general level of risk, ie, the symptoms that are likely to occur, and only provide patients the remote risks if the patient specifically asks for it. Therefore, the informed consent carries risks itself, and they â€Å"only ask that those whose task it is to formulate informed consent rituals pay some attention to the harm that may be caused by the ritual itself† (Loftus & Fries, 2008, p. 217). Loftus & Fries then cited a study that they performed that was unpublished. It involved patients at the Stanford University Medical School who were diagnosed with scleroderma and were treated with a drug cocktail consisting of propranolol and alpha-methyldopa. The patients were informed about the side effects of the drug cocktail, which included dizziness, headaches, upset stomach and tearfulness. Some patients received a standard informed consent form and some received a standard informed consent form plus a special message which explained the placebo effect, in that the patients who received the special message were informed of the phenomenon of experiencing symptoms simply because the symptoms were mentioned. Loftus & Fries found that all patients experienced â€Å"side effects,† even if the patient was given a placebo. They also found that those patients who received the special message experienced fewer side effects than those who did not (Loftus & Fries, 2008, p. 218). Therefore, their point ab out a patient knowing â€Å"too much† was validated. While Loftus & Fries concentrated on the placebo effect as a drawback for informed consent, at least informed consent that lists every possible side-effect, no matter how remote, Audrey et al. (2008) concentrated on the effect informed consent had on patients who want to undergo palliative chemotherapy. The issue that Audrey et al. focuses upon is