Notes from Underground: Dostoevsky Against Rational Egoism

Fyodor Dostoevsky, author of Notes from Underground and critic of rational egoism

The Philosophical Foundations of 1860s Radicalism

After a decade of Siberian exile and compulsory military service, Dostoevsky returned to St. Petersburg. There, he encountered the philosophical claims of a new generation of radical intellectuals that had emerged during his absence. In turn, he responded to their ideas with an uncompromising intellectual struggle (Frank, 2017, p. 16). The most powerful product of this struggle was Notes from Underground.

Above all, the radicalism of the 1860s, led by Nikolay Chernyshevsky and N. A. Dobrolyubov, rested on the doctrine of “rational egoism,” a synthesis of three principal philosophical traditions (Frank, 2017, p. 16):

Ludwig Feuerbach’s Atheism: The idea that religion represents a projection of the human mind and that humanity should glorify itself rather than God (Frank, 2017, p. 16).
Eighteenth-Century French Materialism and Determinism: The claim that nature and human beings operate according to mechanical laws and that science can explain events through strict principles of causality (Frank, 2017, p. 16).
Jeremy Bentham’s Utilitarianism: The doctrine that morality should be defined exclusively in terms of tangible benefits and the calculated interests of individuals and society (Frank, 2017, p. 16).

In his novel What Is to Be Done?, Chernyshevsky advocated the possibility of creating a utopian society. In such a society, for instance, human beings would act according to scientific determinism and rationally calculate their self-interest. Moreover, they would live within an order symbolized by the “Crystal Palace” (Frank, 2017, pp. 16, 429).

Notes from Underground and the Critique of Determinism

Published in 1864, Dostoevsky’s Notes from Underground constitutes a radical ontological repudiation of Chernyshevsky’s claims about determinism, scientific inevitability, and the theory of rational egoism (Frank, 2017, pp. 16, 443). The work’s central character, the Underground Man, rebels against the absolute certainties of science—embodied in the proposition that “two times two makes four.” In addition, he rejects the shallow rationalism that assumes human beings will invariably pursue their own interests (Frank, 2017, pp. 16, 443).

In short, the existential and psychological contradictions of the Underground Man can be summarized in three fundamental points:

The Dialectical Conflict Between Determinism and Moral Sensibility: The Underground Man believes that all human behavior is determined by scientific causality. However, his irrepressible moral sensibilities and conscience continually conflict with this mechanical inevitability, causing him profound inner suffering (Frank, 2017, p. 16).
The Desire to Place the Will Above Reason: Contrary to the rationalists’ claims, the Underground Man argues that individuals may deliberately choose what harms them, even what is painful and absurd, simply to assert their independent will and demonstrate their freedom (Frank, 2017, pp. 16, 443).
Inaction and Self-Destruction: Faced with the explanations offered by science and determinism, the character loses his sense of purpose and falls into a paralyzing state of inaction. As a result, torn between pride and humiliation, he becomes trapped in a psychological prison of his own making, condemned to a cycle of self-destruction (Frank, 2017, pp. 16, 443).

Why Notes from Underground Still Speaks to Us

Today, many readers regard Notes from Underground as one of the first great works of existentialist literature. Admittedly, the Underground Man is bitter, spiteful, and often unbearable. Nevertheless, he defends something essential: the human right to be more than a predictable calculation. In an age of algorithms, data, and behavioral prediction, this defense feels surprisingly modern. At the same time, Dostoevsky does not present his hero as a model. Instead, he shows the price of a freedom that has lost every connection to love and meaning. You can read the full text in English on Project Gutenberg. For a related view of freedom and inner conflict, see Kierkegaard and Anxiety: Why Anxiety Is the Consciousness of Freedom.