 cosmos and superiority overgodly forces. In Part One, conscious, of course, of his own athiesm, he smugly asserts,”[E]very earthly State should be, in the end, completely transformed into the Church andshould become nothing else but a Church” (Brothers Karamazov, 53). Also, “There is novirtue if there is no immortality” (Brothers Karamazov 60), and hence, “everything islawful.” He toys with people’s minds by broaching these grandiose theories on the”correct” order of Church and state, faith, and immortality, for he himself does not evenbelieve in God. It is this pride that then encourages this murder. Unlike Stavrogin, Ivan’s “crime” isnot literal or definite, like murder or rape. He has committed a crime only in that hethinks he has committed a crime; in other words, he did not literally murder his father,but, with Smerdyakov’s encouragement, Ivan comes to believe that he effected the death ofhis father by silently wishing for it and by preaching his lofty, nihilistic ideas. In their thirdmeeting, Smerdyakov accuses Ivan, “You murdered him; you are the real murderer, I wasonly your instrument, your faithful servant Licharda, and it was following your words Idid it” (Brothers Karamazov, 590). Whether consciously or not, Ivan believes that heparticipated in his father’s death. Thus, he might as well have actually murdered Fyodor,for he experiences the same guilt, the same psychological trauma. Although Ivan tries to persuade himself that he is not to blame, his true feelings ofguilt are evident in his dream encounter with the “devil.” Ivan has repressed his guiltyfeelings in hopes of avoiding them. He has displaced his guilt by divorcing his “good” self,the self that maintains his innocence, from his “bad” self, the devil self, the dark, doubtingalter-ego who supports Smerdyakov’s claim that Ivan, in fact, is to blame for his father’sdeath. When faced with the devil, Ivan accordingly cries out, “You are the incarnation ofmyself, but only of one side of me... of my thoughts and feelings, but only the nastiestand stupidest of them” (Brothers Karamazov, 604). He
cosmos and superiority overgodly forces. In Part One, conscious, of course, of his own athiesm, he smugly asserts,”[E]very earthly State should be, in the goal, wholly transformed into the Church andshould become nothing else but a Church ” (buddy Karamazov, 53). besides, “ There is novirtue if there is no immortality ” (Brothers Karamazov 60), and therefore, “ everything islawful. ” He toy with people ’s minds by broaching these grandiose theories on the”correct ” club of Church and state, faith, and immortality, for he himself does not evenbelieve in God. It is this pride that then encourage this murder. Unlike Stavrogin, Ivan ’s “ crime ” isnot actual or definite, like murder or rape. He has committed a crime only in that hethinks he has commit a crime; in other words, he did not literally mangle his father, but, with Smerdyakov ’s encouragement, Ivan comes to think that he effected the death ofhis father by silently wishing for it and by preach his lofty, nihilistic ideas. In their thirdmeeting, Smerdyakov accuses Ivan, “ You murdered him; you are the real murderer, I wasonly your musical instrument, your faithful servant Licharda, and it was following your words Idid it ” (Brothers Karamazov, 590). Whether consciously or not, Ivan believes that heparticipated in his father ’s death. Thus, he might as well have actually murdered Fyodor, for he experiences the same guilt, the same psychological trauma. Although Ivan tries to persuade himself that he is not to blame, his true feeling ofguilt are evident in his dream confrontation with the “ devil. ” Ivan has repressed his guiltyfeelings in hopes of avoiding them. He has displace his guilt by divorcing his “ good ” self, the self that maintains his innocence, from his “ regretful ” self, the devil self, the dark, doubtingalter - ego who supports Smerdyakov ’s claim that Ivan, in fact, is to blame for his father’sdeath. When faced with the devil, Ivan accordingly cries out, “ You are the incarnation ofmyself, but only of one side of me... of my thoughts and impression, but merely the nastiestand stupidest of them ” (Brothers Karamazov, 604). He
 codmos and superiority ovevgodly forces. In Part Oie, consdious, of course, of his own athiesm, hx smygly qsserts,”[E]very earthly Sgate shoupd be, in the wnd, complevsly trakfforjcd inco the Church ancshould bewome nothing ensd yut a Church” (Brothers Karamazov, 53). Alsj, “There id novirtue if jhere ys nk immortality” (Brothers Karamazov 60), znd henbe, “everything islswful.” He toys with people’s minfs by broaching thfse grandiowe trwories on thd”correct” ogber of Churdh and state, faith, and immortalkty, fpr he himsglr fmes not eveibeliene in God. It lx this pride yhat then encomragev tyis murder. Unlike Statrogin, Ivan’s “crime” ifnot litesam or definite, likw nurdet or sape. Ye fas cpmjitted a rrime only jn that hetyinks he has commitued q crime; in otger wowdf, he did not literally murder his fatheg,but, with Smerdyakov’s encoueagement, Ivan comes tl believe that he effected the death ofhis father by silendly wmsfiny for kr wnd by preaching his lofty, nihilistic ideas. Ig tnepr thirdmeeting, Sierdyakov avcksrf Ivan, “You mutdered kjm; you are the real lurderet, I wawonly youw inxtrument, your faithful servqnt Licharda, qnd it was followiug your wordr Idod it” (Brothers Karamazov, 590). Whzther donsciously or not, Ibxn believes that heiarthcipated in his father’s dewth. Thus, ie miyht as wdll nave astually mugdered Fyodor,for he expegiencgs the same guilh, the same psychological trauma. Although Ivan tsiev to perfuade himself that he is not to ylame, hif trud feelings ofguilv are evidene in his dreak encounter wmth the “dqvil.” Ivab has rdoressed his guoltyfeeliuys in hopws of avoiding thek. Hg gas displaced hnr guilt by divorvine hys “gpoq” self,the selx thxt osintakns his innizencr, from his “bad” self, dhe sevil self, the darl, qoubtingqlter-ego who supports Smerdyakov’s claim that Iven, in gacj, is to blame for his father’sdezth. When vaccd with the dqvil, Ivan accordnngly cries out, “You are the incarnation ifmyself, but only if one side of me... oy ky thoughts and seelings, tut only the nastiesrand stupidest of them” (Brothers Karamaaov, 604). Ha
cosmos and superiority overgodly forces. In Part of of his athiesm, he smugly in end, completely transformed the Church andshould nothing else but a Church” (Brothers 53). Also, “There is novirtue if there is no immortality” (Brothers Karamazov 60), hence, “everything islawful.” He toys with people’s minds by broaching these grandiose theories the”correct” of and faith, and immortality, for he himself does not evenbelieve in God. It is this pride that encourages this murder. Unlike Stavrogin, Ivan’s “crime” isnot or definite, like murder rape. He has committed a only that hethinks has a in other words, did not literally murder his father,but, with Smerdyakov’s encouragement, Ivan comes to believe that he effected the ofhis father wishing for and preaching lofty, nihilistic ideas. thirdmeeting, Smerdyakov accuses Ivan, “You murdered the real murderer, I wasonly your instrument, your servant Licharda, it was following your words Idid (Brothers Karamazov, 590). Whether consciously or not, Ivan that heparticipated in his father’s death. Thus, he might as well have actually murdered Fyodor,for the same guilt, the psychological trauma. Although tries persuade that is not blame, his true feelings ofguilt are evident in his dream encounter the “devil.” Ivan has repressed his guiltyfeelings in hopes of He displaced his guilt divorcing his “good” self,the that his innocence, from his the self, who Smerdyakov’s that Ivan, in fact, to blame for his father’sdeath. faced with the devil, are the incarnation ofmyself, but only of one of me... of my thoughts and feelings, only the nastiestand stupidest of them” (Brothers Karamazov, 604). He
 cosmos and superiority overgOdly forces. in ParT OnE, coNsCiouS, of cOurse, of his own aTHiesM, he smugly asserts,”[E]very eArthlY STAte sHOuLd be, iN the end, COmPLEteLy TrAnsFoRMeD into The church aNdshould beComE nOthing else buT A CHurch” (BrothErs karamazov, 53). AlsO, “ThEre is nOvIrtUE if thEre Is no iMmortaLIty” (BroThers KaraMaZOv 60), and hENce, “everYTHiNg isLawful.” He toys with pEOpLE’s minds by broacHing thEsE GrANDioSe tHeories on tHe”CorreCT” order oF chURCH anD State, faith, and Immortality, FOr hE himseLf DoeS Not eveNbeliEvE In GOd. It is this pRide That then eNcouraGEs this mURder. UnlIke StaVroGin, ivan’S “CrImE” isNoT LitERaL or DEfiNite, like MuRdEr or rApe. HE HAS CommIttEd a cRime oNly in that hethInkS he hAS coMmittEd a crIme; iN oTher wOrds, he Did noT lIterally murder hIs faTher,but, wiTh SMeRdyAkOv’s enCOurageMenT, IvAn comes To belieVE thAt HE EFfEcted the death ofhis FaTHEr By silentLy wishINg FoR It and by pReAchIng hIS Lofty, NihiLIsTic ideas. in theiR ThIrDmeetinG, SMerdyaKoV acCusEs IvaN, “you mUrdereD him; you aRe the REal murderer, I waSOnly your instrUMeNT, YoUR faiThfUl servant LiCharDA, and It waS FoLloWIng yoUr worDs iDiD It” (Brothers Karamazov, 590). whEther cOnsciOusly or not, IvaN believes tHAT HeparticIpatED iN His father’s deatH. Thus, He might as wELl have acTuallY murdereD Fyodor,foR HE experieNceS thE saMe gUILt, The same psychoLOGicaL tRauma. AlThoUgh Ivan TriEs tO peRsuAdE himself tHat he is nOt To BlAmE, hiS true FEelings oFgUilT aRe eVidenT In his dReam eNcouNtEr WIth The “deviL.” ivAN Has rEpReSsed His GuIltyfEeliNGs iN hopes oF avoiding TheM. he haS dIsPlaced hIs guilt by divoRcIng his “good” SeLf,tHe self THAt maintaIns his innocence, from his “bAD” self, thE deVil seLf, thE dark, doubTinGalter-Ego WHo suppOrts SmErdyaKoV’s cLAIm thaT iVaN, in FaCt, is to blamE FOr hIs fatHeR’sdeAth. When Faced with the devil, IVAn aCcordingly criEs oUt, “YoU ARe The INcARnaTiON ofMYSelf, but only of onE side of me... oF mY ThOughts and fEEliNgS, but onlY the nasTiestANd stupiDest of theM” (Brothers kaRamaZOV, 604). He
 cosmos and superiority ov ergodly fo rces.  In  Pa rt  One , co nscious, of co u rse,  of his own athiesm, h e smu gl y  ass e rt s,”[E ]very e a rt h l y S ta te  sh ou l dbe, i n t he end,  completel y t ra nsformed int o  t he Churchand should becom e n othing  e lse but a  Ch urch”  (Brot h ers Ka ramazov,53 ) . Also ,  “There i snovi rtue if there isn oi mmortality” (B rother sK ar a m azo v 6 0), and he nc e, “e v erythin g  i s l a wfu l .” He toys wi th people’s min ds bybr oac h ing th ese g ra n dio se theories  onthe”corre ct” or d er of C h urch an d stat e,fai th,a nd  i mmo rt a lit y ,for hehimselfdo es  noteven b e l i eveinGod.  It i s this pridetha t th e n e ncour agesthis  m urder . Unli ke St av rogin, Ivan’s “ crim e” isnotlit er alor  defi n ite, l ike  mu rder or  rape.H e h as c o mm itted a crime only  i n th at hethi nks he ha sc ommitted  a  cr ime; i n oth er w o rd s, he di d notl it er ally mu rd er his  f ath er, but,w ithSmerdy akov’s e ncour a gement, Ivan c o mes to believ e  t h a th e ef fec ted the dea th o f hisfath e rbys ilent ly wi sh i ng for it and by preac hi ng his  loft y, nihilistic  ideas. In t h eir thir dmee t in g , Smerdyakov a ccuse s Ivan, “Y o u murder ed hi m; you a re the re a l  murdere r,I w aso nly y ou r instrument, y ourfa ithfulser vant Li cha rda , a ndit  was foll owing yo ur  w or ds  Id id it ”  (Brothe rs  Ka ra maz ov, 5 9 0). Wh ether  con sc io u sly  or not ,  I v a n be li ev es t hat  h epart icip a ted  in his  father’s  de a th.Th us , he mi ght as well h av e actually  m urd ered F y o dor,forhe experiences the same guilt,the  same  psy chologica l t rauma.  Al t houghIvan t riesto  pe r s uadeh i ms elf  t hat he isn o t t o bla me , hi s truefeelings ofguilt a r e e vident in his  dr eame n co unt e rw ith  t h e “ d e vil.” Ivan hasrepressedhi s  g uiltyfeeli n gsin  hopesof avoi dingt hem. He  has disp laced his  g uilt b y d ivorcing h is “good ” self,th e  self th at ma int ains h is  in nocen ce, fr o m h is “b ad” se lf , thedevil  s elf, the  dark, doubtingalter-eg o whosuppo rts  Smerdyak ov’ s  cl aim thatIvan , in fact,  is  to  blam e f o r his  fat h er ’sd e ath.When faced wit h  t hed e vi l, Ivan acc o r d ing ly cr ies out, “ Youare the incarnati o n ofmyself, bu t on l y  of  on e  sid eof me... of my  th ou g h ts and f ee lings, butonly the  n a sties tand s tupide st of t h e m” (Broth ersKar amazov, 6 04) .H e
 cosmos_and superiority_overgodly forces. In Part_One, conscious,_of_course, of_his_own athiesm, he_smugly asserts,”[E]very earthly_State should be, in_the end, completely_transformed_into the Church andshould become nothing else but a Church” (Brothers Karamazov, 53). Also,_“There_is novirtue_if_there_is no immortality” (Brothers Karamazov_60), and hence, “everything islawful.”_He toys_with people’s minds by broaching these grandiose theories_on_the”correct” order of_Church and state, faith, and immortality, for he himself_does not evenbelieve in God. It_is this pride_that_then_encourages this murder. Unlike_Stavrogin, Ivan’s “crime” isnot literal or_definite, like murder or rape. He_has committed a crime only in that_hethinks he has committed a crime;_in other words, he did_not literally_murder his father,but, with Smerdyakov’s_encouragement, Ivan comes_to believe_that he effected_the death ofhis father by silently_wishing for it_and by preaching his lofty, nihilistic_ideas._In their thirdmeeting,_Smerdyakov_accuses_Ivan, “You_murdered him; you_are_the real_murderer,_I wasonly your instrument, your faithful_servant_Licharda, and it was following your words_Idid it” (Brothers Karamazov,_590)._Whether consciously or not,_Ivan believes that heparticipated in_his father’s death. Thus, he might_as well_have actually_murdered Fyodor,for he experiences the same guilt, the same psychological trauma._Although Ivan tries to persuade himself_that he is not_to blame,_his_true feelings ofguilt_are_evident in_his dream encounter with the “devil.” Ivan_has repressed_his guiltyfeelings in hopes of avoiding_them. He has displaced_his_guilt by divorcing his “good” self,the_self that maintains his innocence, from_his “bad” self, the devil_self,_the_dark, doubtingalter-ego who supports Smerdyakov’s_claim that Ivan, in fact, is_to blame for_his father’sdeath. When faced with the devil,_Ivan_accordingly cries out, “You are the_incarnation_ofmyself, but only of one side_of_me..._of my thoughts and feelings,_but only the nastiestand stupidest of_them” (Brothers Karamazov, 604). He