Do you see novels as sources of "omg, profound philosophical

File: thinkingface.png (53KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 256x256px

When I say novels I mean non-fiction, and excluding religion and something like Thus Spake Tharathustra, which I think is a philosophy book written as a parable.

I am on the final 70 pages of the Brothers Karamazov and am bored to death. It feels like a long winded, paid by the word, half assed murder mystery / melodrama, with lightly sprinkled half assed jabs by Dostoevsky at stuff he doesn't like, such as Socialism (he has a pretentious 9 year old strawman, not even joking), atheism, psychology, and other stuff I can't remember.

Really, this is it? This is the "book about everything" that was supposed to get my noggin joggin? It seems like any attempt to gain "insights" from this book relies on the same procedure as any other book: a load of half-assed, unfalsifiable*, barely justified extrapolations and conjectures relating to Dostoevsky himself and the times he lived in.

I don't understand. Did I miss the memo or brainwashing session that would have caused me to readily make half-assed extrapolations or conclusions based on parts of novels?

*I'm not saying that unfalsifiable equals wrong. But I could easily make my own unfalsifiable conjectures, and we all know the only reason my ones would be taken less seriously than a Harvard Professor's would be mere fashion.