I felt like I read a story about a robot. Was Fjodor so ahead

He and Nietzsche both predicted communism rising out of the world turning away from God (morals) so I understand

Dosti-kun was ahead of his time and still relevant today despite what some hipsters might say about him.

>beta uprising

Back to r9k, underage memer

>>7580236
I'm not a robot myself, but how the underground man was portrayed made me instantly think of the stereotypically bitter and angry robot

>>7580213
Not OP, but I just read this and while I got a lot out of it, I feel like I still missed the point.

I was interested mostly in the second half, his absolute ineptitude around other people, his twisted idea of relationships (e.g. his desire to be in control of other people), how totally pathetic he is around others, but especially his encounters with Liza. I was mostly interested in how, when people begin to get a little too close (like Liza does), he ends up snapping and scaring them away; Liza, for instance, witnesses his miserable existence and his "injured dignity" -- then he says,
I'd been humiliated, so I, too, wanted to humiliate" and he ends up blowing his shot at human connection. I was interested in this particularly because, at least in this way, I've totally been the Underground Man (fuck, maybe I still am). The guy's profoundly incapable of human connection.

But I still feel like most of the book went over my hand, especially the first half. As far as the whole free will thing, where he says we have free will in that we can always do that which is not in our interest, puzzles me a little -- he seems to be using a rather shallow criterion for determinism, i.e. "man always does what's in his best interest ----> no free will"

Could someone red pill me on this book? I still liked it a lot and will definitely reread it.

>>7581722
I've only read the first half as of yet so keep that in mind but what I got from 'the introduction' was that all the stances he tries to take down are of a contemporary of Dosto that Dosto disagreed with.
So maybe you're not meant to focus on the conclusions of the underground man as much (I feel that his reasoning and his conclusions are supposed to be a bit wonky and absurd, so as to be funny), but that you're supposed to recognise that the standpoints that the U.M. attacks are wonky and absurd as well.

There is some truth though in the idea that man does what he wants, not necessarily what logic dictates he should want.