Tammsaare ja Dostojevski. Maailmapiltide kõrvutus
Tammsaare and Dostoyevsky: a Comparison of Two Worldviews

Summary/Abstract: A. H. Tammsaare believed that sooner or later every new religion would degenerate into superstition, thus causing harm. This is why the most humane attitude, in his opinion, involved dismissal of religiousness from the start. That made Tammsaare prefer the naturalist worldview (despite its deficiencies), which had dominated European thought since the 19th century. Dostoyevsky, however, saw the greatest evil in lack of faith. That was the woe, he believed, afflicting Western Europe, where lack of money was the only "sin" recognized. Dostoyevsky's only hope was that Greek Orthodoxy, predominating in Russia, where Christianity had, in his opinion, retained its genuine integrity, would triumph over Europe and amend the otherwise hopeless situation. Consequently, what one of the two authors considered the ultimate affliction was regarded as a source of hope by the other. And yet Tammsaare was convinced that Dostoyevsky belonged to the best of authors, albeit not beyond belles lettres. The Slavophilic views that Dostoyevsky adhered to were, however, not appraised by Tammsaare. The ultimate aim of the article is to explicate the most obvious difference between Orthodoxy and naturalism.

• Details
• Contents