What kind of person can be considered responsive to the arguments of crime and punishment. Cowardice in crime and punishment “Courage and cowardice as an indicator of a person’s inner strength”

In the abundance of all human characters, traits, properties, there are such definitions as courage and cowardice. But what does this mean? Which person can be called a brave man, and which one can be called a coward? And what is real courage? Does the school bully act boldly, offending those who are younger, weaker, those who cannot stand up for themselves? And will a person who remains silent in response to an offensive statement addressed to him be called a coward?

There is thoughtless, stupid courage.

For example, the courage of a guy who climbs onto a roof to make an impression. But there is real courage, the kind that makes soldiers rush into battle, that guides a person when he defends others. People like Gagarin, who flew into space for the first time, were truly brave. What was waiting for him there? Emptiness. But still he did not chicken out. The hero of Russia, Alexander Prokhorenko, was also brave. What motivated him there, behind enemy lines, when he called fire on himself? Of course it was incredible courage.

Taras Bulba, from the work of the same name by Nikolai Gogol, was a very brave man. His son Ostap was just as brave. When Ostap was executed, he only shouted: “Dad!” And Taras answered him, risking his life for the last time to support his son. But Taras also has a younger son, Andriy, his courage on the night when he steals food for his beloved is explained not by strength of character, but only by the recklessness of a man in love.

When performing a feat, a person is guided by different feelings - this is love for the homeland and love for relatives or a sense of duty. What motivates a cowardly person? For example, Rodion Raskolnikov, the hero of Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel Crime and Punishment. The young man has a theory that people are divided into two types. Either you are a trembling creature or you have the right. Rodion considers himself to be in the second category, but during the course of the story it becomes clear that Rodion actually belongs to the first category. He did not think about the consequences when committing murder, he only thought that he would have money. And then, hiding from justice, he is tormented by doubts: maybe he should surrender? But he never makes any attempt to go to the police; only Sonya encourages him to repent.

Pontius Pilate from the novel “The Master and Margarita” can also be called cowardly. When the procurator is faced with a choice: to execute Yeshua and be safe, or to listen to himself, but take a risk and pardon the condemned man, he chooses the first. Because it makes him feel better. Cowards are selfish, they think only about themselves and when doing things they think only about how it will be better for them. Brave people think about others, which is why they can and do brave things.

As soon as a child begins to understand and appreciate his place in the team, he masters the concepts of courage and cowardice. And already at an early age we understand that being brave is good, and being cowardly is bad, that courage is the ability to take decisive action in a difficult situation, and cowardice is avoiding these actions, running away. Is a brave person always right in his actions? How can one distinguish genuine courage from ostentatious bravado?

In Russian literature there are enough examples of brave actions of heroes, and vice versa, actions of absurd bravado, which are of no benefit to anyone. In the novel “Hero of Our Time” by M.Yu. Lermontov, in the story about Princess Mary, one of the heroes is the young cadet Grushnitsky. In Pechorin’s description, Grushnitsky appears as a man who clearly demonstrates a kind of courage that is not ours: “I saw him in action: he waves a saber, shouts and rushes forward with his eyes closed. This is something not Russian courage!” On the one hand, Grushnitsky has the St. George Cross, and on the other hand, according to Pechorin, he is a coward. Is it so? Suffice it to recall the scene of the quarrel between Grushnitsky and Pechorin, when the former cadet slandered the princess in order to take revenge, and Pechorin demanded an apology. He preferred to lie rather than admit in front of everyone that he had actually slandered the girl. Because he was afraid of condemnation and from whom? A vile water society, ready to slander anyone, just to look like a hero in the eyes of others. Dragoon captain, who was the leader of this society. Even in the face of death, Grushnitsky “wraps himself in pompous phrases,” proclaiming nonsense: “There is no place for the two of us on earth...” Pompous and catchy, but why? To look! True courage would be to admit one's cowardice, the fear of appearing pathetic in front of a pompous society that proclaims false values. But Grushnitsky is not capable of this.

In L.N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace,” Nikolai Rostov considers himself a brave man. And so it is. Yes, in the first battle near Shengraben, he was afraid of the approaching French and, instead of opening fire, he threw down his pistol and ran away like a hare. Tolstoy writes about this, without embellishment. Because this was the first fight. Bravery is formed over time; later Rostov will become a real officer, not only in battle, but also in life. When he lost a fabulous sum to Dolokhov, he confessed to himself the crime he had committed, vowed never to sit down at the card table and to make up for the entire loss to his family. And when fate brought him together with Princess Bolkonskaya, he was able to quickly restore order among the rebellious serfs, putting them in their place.

Courage is a quality that is formed over time; a person draws conclusions from unsightly actions committed under the influence of circumstances and never repeats them. This is true courage.

When starting to work on the novel, Dostoevsky wrote: “...to destroy uncertainty, that is, to explain the whole murder one way or another...” Some critics read that the author failed to do this. In his novel “Crime and Punishment” Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky raises the problem of permissiveness, “Napoleonism”, the elevation of one person over another. He shows how this seemingly quite logical and well-constructed theory breaks down in practice, bringing torment, suffering and, ultimately, repentance

The main character of the novel.

Everything that served as the motive for Rodion Raskolnikov’s crime is built on deep, intricate contradictions, which we have to understand. For the first time, the idea of ​​permissiveness appears in Dostoevsky on the pages of the novel “The Double,” and it is revealed more deeply in “Crime and Punishment.” Both works show the collapse of this theory. What exactly is this theory? According to Raskolnikov, there are people who are allowed everything. People who are above society, the crowd. People who are even allowed to kill. And so Raskolnikov decides to cross

The line that separates these “great” people from the crowd. This very trait becomes murder, the murder of a decrepit, petty old woman-usurer who has nothing left to do in this world (according to Raskolnikov’s thoughts, of course). “Everything is in the hands of a person, and yet he misses everything out of sheer cowardice,” thinks Raskolnikov.

Having chosen the role of the savior of humanity, Rodion Raskolnikov strives to “stand up” over the stupid crowd and, with the power of his power, do what he wants. But his action, on the contrary, shows his inhumanity and worthlessness. On the eve of the crime in the tavern, he hears a conversation consonant with his theory - that this old woman can be easily killed and everyone will only say thank you for it. But in response to the question: “Will you kill the old woman yourself or not?” - the interlocutor replies: “Of course not.” Is this cowardice? For Raskolnikov, apparently - yes. But in fact... It seems to me that these are elementary human moral and ethical standards. “Thou shalt not kill,” says one of the commandments. This is what Raskolnikov is stepping over, and it is for this crime that the punishment will follow.

“The point is not how to justify the crime, but that it is unacceptable to justify it, no matter what,” the author reflects on the motives of his hero’s crime. Two words - “self-justification” and “self-deception” merge more and more clearly for Raskolnikov as the novel progresses. Talking about his article, in which Raskolnikov puts forward the theory of permissiveness, first to Porfiry Petrovich, then to Sonechka, when they already know that it was he who committed the murder, Raskolnikov seems to be trying to justify himself. This theory would have been interesting and even entertaining if he had not moved on to its practical implementation. After all, if Raskolnikov himself justifies his crime by saying that the old usurer brought only harm to people, that no one needs her and that she is not worthy of life, then what to do with the murder of the innocent Lizaveta, who simply found herself in the way of the implementation of the “brilliant "Raskolnikov's plan? This is where this theory makes its first hole in practical implementation. This is precisely what ruins Raskolnikov.

The trouble of the main character of Dostoevsky’s novel is that, having lost solid spiritual guidelines in the world of moral relativity, he inevitably takes the path of insignificance, hiding behind the guise of greatness. The murder of Lizaveta makes one think: if an accident can lead to such tragic consequences, then perhaps the root of evil lies in this very idea? Evil, even towards a useless old woman, cannot be the basis of a good deed. The punishment for what was done turns out to be no less terrible than the crime itself - what could be worse than the suffering and torment of a person who has realized his guilt and has completely repented? Raskolnikov finds peace only in faith, faith in God, which he replaced with the theory of the “superman”.

Pisarev argued that the root of Raskolnikov’s crime was his poverty, but Raskolnikov himself explained his act to Sonya Marmeladova this way: “You know... what I’ll tell you: if only I had killed because I was hungry, then I would be happy now! Know this!" Nature, which drives the idea of ​​the hero of “Crime and Punishment”, as he himself admits: “if not reason, then the devil.” The problems posed by Dostoevsky are acute and relevant in our time. His main idea, in my opinion, is that a society built on momentary gain, on dividing people into “necessary” and “unnecessary”, a society in which people become accustomed to the worst of sins - murder, cannot be moral and will never people will not feel happy in such a society. After all, the principle that Raskolnikov tried to cross was conscience.

Courage and timidity are moral categories associated with the spiritual side of the individual. They are an indicator of human dignity, demonstrate weakness, or, on the contrary, strength of character, which manifests itself in difficult life situations. Our history is rich in such vicissitudes, therefore, arguments in the direction of “Courage and Cowardice” for the final essay are presented in abundance in Russian classics. Examples from Russian literature will help the reader understand how and where courage manifests itself and fear comes out.

1. In the novel L.N. In Tolstoy’s “War and Peace,” one such situation is war, which puts the heroes before a choice: to give in to fear and save their own lives, or, despite the danger, to preserve their fortitude. Andrei Bolkonsky shows remarkable courage in battle; he is the first to rush into battle to encourage the soldiers. He knows that he may die in battle, but the fear of death does not frighten him. Fyodor Dolokhov also fights desperately in the war. The feeling of fear is alien to him. He knows that a brave soldier can influence the outcome of a battle, so he bravely rushes into battle, despising
   cowardice. But the young cornet Zherkov gives in to fear and refuses to give the order to retreat. The letter, which was never delivered to them, causes the death of many soldiers. The price for showing cowardice turns out to be prohibitively high.
2. Courage conquers time and immortalizes names. Cowardice remains a shameful stain on the pages of history and literature.
   In the novel by A.S. Pushkin’s “The Captain’s Daughter”, an example of courage and courage is the image of Pyotr Grinev. He is ready at the cost of his life to defend the Belogorsk fortress under the onslaught of Pugachev, and the fear of death is alien to the hero at the moment of danger. A heightened sense of justice and duty does not allow him to escape or refuse the oath. Shvabrin, clumsy and petty in his motives, is presented in the novel as the antipode of Grinev. He goes over to Pugachev's side, committing betrayal. He is driven by fear for his own life, while the fates of other people mean nothing to Shvabrin, who is ready to save himself by exposing another to the blow. His image entered the history of Russian literature as one of the archetypes of cowardice.
3. War reveals hidden human fears, the most ancient of which is the fear of death. In V. Bykov’s story “The Crane Cry,” the heroes face a seemingly impossible task: to detain the German troops. Each of them understands that fulfilling their duty is possible only at the cost of their own lives. Everyone must decide for themselves what is more important to them: to avoid death or to carry out orders. Pshenichny believes that life is more valuable than a ghostly victory, so he is ready to surrender in advance. He decides that surrendering to the Germans is much wiser than risking his life in vain. Ovseev also agrees with him. He regrets that he did not have time to escape before the arrival of German troops, and spends most of the battle sitting in a trench. During the next attack, he makes a cowardly attempt to escape, but Glechik shoots at him, not allowing him to escape. Glechik himself is no longer afraid to die. It seems to him that only now, in a moment of complete despair, did he feel responsible for the outcome of the battle. The fear of death for him is small and insignificant compared to the thought that by fleeing he could betray the memory of his fallen comrades. This is the true heroism and fearlessness of a hero doomed to death.
4. Vasily Terkin is another archetype hero who has gone down in the history of literature as the image of a brave, cheerful and gallant soldier going into battle with a smile on his lips. But it is not so much with feigned fun and well-aimed jokes that he attracts the reader, but with genuine heroism, masculinity and perseverance. The image of Tyorkin was created by Tvardovsky as a joke, however, the author depicts the war in the poem without embellishment. Against the backdrop of military realities, the simple and captivating image of the fighter Tyorkin becomes the popular embodiment of the ideal of a real soldier. Of course, the hero is afraid of death, dreams of family comfort, but he knows for sure that protecting the Fatherland is his main duty. Duty to the Motherland, to fallen comrades and to oneself.
5. In the story “Coward” by V.M. Garshin displays the character's characteristics in the title, thereby, as if assessing him in advance, hinting at the further course of the story. “The war absolutely haunts me,” the hero writes in his notes. He is afraid that he will be recruited as a soldier and does not want to go to war. It seems to him that millions of ruined human lives cannot be justified by a great goal. However, reflecting on his own fear, he comes to the conclusion that he can hardly accuse himself of cowardice. He is disgusted by the idea that he can take advantage of influential contacts and evade war. His inner sense of truth does not allow him to resort to such a petty and unworthy means. “You can’t run away from a bullet,” says the hero before his death, thereby accepting it, realizing his involvement in the ongoing battle. His heroism lies in the voluntary renunciation of cowardice, in the inability to do otherwise.
6. “And the dawns here are quiet...” B. Vasilyeva’s book is by no means about cowardice. On the contrary, it is about incredible, superhuman courage. Moreover, its heroes prove that war can have a feminine face, and courage is not only a man’s lot. Five young girls are fighting an unequal battle with a German detachment, a battle from which they are unlikely to emerge alive. Each of them understands this, but none of them stops before death and humbly goes towards it to fulfill their duty. All of them - Liza Brichkina, Rita Osyanina, Zhenka Komelkova, Sonya Gurvich and Galya Chetvertak - die at the hands of the Germans. However, there is not a shadow of doubt about their silent feat. They know for sure that there can be no other choice. Their faith is unshakable, and their perseverance and courage are examples of true heroism, direct proof that there are no limits to human capabilities.
7. “Am I a trembling creature or do I have rights?” - asks Rodion Raskolnikov, confident that he is more likely the latter than the former. However, due to an incomprehensible irony of life, everything turns out to be exactly the opposite. Raskolnikov's soul turns out to be cowardly, despite the fact that he found the strength to commit murder. In an attempt to rise above the masses, he loses himself and crosses the moral line. In the novel, Dostoevsky emphasizes that taking the wrong path of self-deception is very simple, but overcoming fear in oneself and incurring the punishment that Raskolnikov is so afraid of is necessary for the spiritual purification of the hero. Sonya Marmeladova comes to the aid of Rodion, who lives in constant fear for what he has done. Despite all her external fragility, the heroine has a persistent character. She instills confidence and courage in the hero, helps him overcome cowardice, and is even ready to share Raskolnikov’s punishment in order to save his soul. Both heroes struggle with fate and circumstances, this shows their strength and courage.
8. “The Fate of a Man” by M. Sholokhov is another book about courage and courage, the hero of which is an ordinary soldier Andrei Sokolov, to whose fate the pages of the book are dedicated. The war forced him to leave home and go to the front to undergo trials of fear and death. In battle, Andrei is honest and brave, like many soldiers. He is faithful to duty, for which he is ready to pay even with his own life. Stunned by a live shell, Sokolov sees the approaching Germans, but does not want to flee, deciding that the last minutes must be spent with dignity. He refuses to obey the invaders, his courage impresses even the German commandant, who sees in him a worthy opponent and a valiant soldier. Fate is merciless to the hero: he loses the most precious thing in the war - his loving wife and children. But, despite the tragedy, Sokolov remains a man, lives according to the laws of conscience, according to the laws of a brave human heart.
9. V. Aksenov’s novel “The Moscow Saga” is dedicated to the history of the Gradov family, which gave its entire life to serving the Fatherland. This is a trilogy novel, which is a description of the life of an entire dynasty, closely connected by family ties. The heroes are ready to sacrifice a lot for the sake of each other's happiness and well-being. In desperate attempts to save loved ones, they show remarkable courage, the call of conscience and duty for them is decisive, guiding all their decisions and actions. Each of the heroes is brave in their own way. Nikita Gradov heroically defends his homeland. He receives the title of Hero of the Soviet Union. The hero is uncompromising in his decisions, and several military operations are successfully carried out under his leadership. The Gradovs’ adopted son, Mitya, also goes to war. By creating heroes, plunging them into an atmosphere of constant anxiety, Aksenov shows that courage is the lot of not only an individual, but also an entire generation raised to respect family values ​​and moral duty.
10. Feats are an eternal theme in literature. Cowardice and courage, their confrontation, numerous victories of one over the other, are now becoming the subject of debate and search by modern writers.
    One of these authors was the famous British writer Joan K. Rowling and her world-famous hero, Harry Potter. Her series of novels about a boy wizard won the hearts of young readers with the fantastical plot and, of course, the brave heart of the central character. Each of the books is a story of the struggle between good and evil, in which the first always wins, thanks to the courage of Harry and his friends. In the face of danger, each of them remains steadfast and believes in the final triumph of good, with which, according to a happy tradition, the winners are rewarded for courage and bravery.
Interesting? Save it on your wall!

Literature is full of examples of both generous and vengeful heroes. Some we, as readers, can take as an example, while others are clear illustrations of what not to do. Dostoevsky’s “Crime and Punishment” also contains such opposite characters, capable of atrocities and revenge or goodness and generosity.

1. (Revenge is useless and leads to bad consequences) Raskolnikov’s crime can be called a kind of revenge. He is tormented by social injustice, that the extremely repulsive old money-lender, for all her wealth, is unusually greedy, and poor people live in poverty. Thinking through and analyzing the theory of “trembling creatures with rights,” the hero nevertheless decides to challenge the current situation. However, his means to achieve his goal are robbery and murder, so no good came of his so-called revenge - the hero only conscientiously experienced what he had done, not knowing how not to go crazy. Revenge most often implies cruelty, therefore, even to achieve a fair result, you should not resort to atrocities: the taste of a well-deserved victory will not be so sweet, but rather only spoiled by the bitter taste of revenge.
2. (The power of generosity and its role in human relationships) Thanks to the positive qualities of other characters, Dostoevsky's novel is painted in bright colors. Sonechka Marmeladova, having learned about Rodion Raskolnikov’s act, did not give up on the hero. On the contrary, the girl sincerely wanted to save the soul of the poor young man, so she advised him to repent of his crime. Sonya even reads to Raskolnikov the legend of the resurrection of Lazarus with the hope of the revival of a new life. Realizing that Raskolnikov regrets the murder, she sympathizes with him, not leaving him without support. Sonya's immense love for people and responsiveness were able to pull Rodion out of a terrible abyss. Thus, the author emphasizes the power of generosity, which can save the human soul.
3. (Generous people often fall victim to rigidity; this quality does not bring happiness) Unfortunately, even kind and compassionate people can face unfair revenge and cruelty. Often they become innocent victims of the situation, as happened with Sonya Marmeladova. At her father's wake, Luzhin, Dunya Raskolnikova's failed fiancé, put a hundred rubles in the girl's pocket in order to later accuse her of theft. Luzhin had nothing specifically against Sonya: thus, he only wanted to take revenge on Raskolnikov for kicking him out of the apartment. Knowing that Rodion had a great attitude towards Sonya, Luzhin took advantage of the situation, but Lebezyatnikov saved Marmeladov’s daughter from slander. The hero's revenge was not successful; everyone was only convinced of his immorality.
4. You can fight for justice without revenge. Investigator Porfiry Petrovich is very talented in his field, and he guessed about Raskolnikov’s crime long before his confession. Having no evidence against the main character, he tried to psychologically bring Rodion into the open. After reading Raskolnikov’s article, his fainting and indignation that the investigator is playing with him instead of acting according to form, Porfiry Petrovich is only convinced of his intuition: “It’s no longer possible to give yourself away.” However, Porfiry pushed Raskolnikov to confess not in order to make his work easier, or to somehow take revenge on the criminal with real punishment. On the contrary, he did this out of deep generosity and compassion, because turning himself in can mitigate the hero’s punishment. Porfiry Petrovich is a man for whom justice is not an empty phrase, but in his work he compassionately shows generosity towards the suffering Raskolnikov.
5. (The price of generosity, an example of a generous person) Showing generosity is not an easy task; sometimes you have to give up what you want and make concessions. The Raskolnikov family lived very poorly, and in order to get out of their difficult situation, Rodion’s sister Dunya was going to marry the calculating businessman Luzhin. Raskolnikov understood that his sister was doing this not out of love, but out of a desire to help their mother and Rodion himself. Not resigning himself to this situation, the main character insists on terminating the engagement: he understood that it would be in Luzhin’s interests to reproach Dunya and command his future wife, because he saved her from poverty. Dunya was ready to do this, which speaks of her care and desire to help her family. But, fortunately, Rodion here also turns out to be not stingy with generosity, and does not allow his sister to ruin her life. Being generous is not so easy; for this you need to be ready for self-sacrifice. In addition, it is equally important that the people for whom one makes concessions appreciate it.
6. (Can revenge be fair? Revenge of fate) Svidrigailov is the embodiment of Raskolnikov’s theory. At first glance, he is not bothered by pangs of conscience, but he is guilty of more than one death. But, if judicial punishments never overtook the hero, this does not mean that Svidrigailov was not avenged by fate. Arkady Ivanovich himself admits to Raskolnikov that ghosts come to him, which means that the character feels his own guilt. Revenge can be fair and committed not by man, but by fate, this is exactly what Svidrigailov expected. For everything he had done, the hero was avenged by an unfortunate fate - he was left without support, as a result of which he could not stand it and committed suicide.
7. The generosity of friends can help anyone out in difficult times. Having committed the long-awaited crime, Raskolnikov can no longer behave as usual, although he tries to avert any suspicion from himself. The murder of the old pawnbroker did not save him from poverty, because the hero, in the pangs of conscience and fear, got rid of everything stolen. His friend Razumikhin repeatedly comes to Rodion’s aid, noticing that something strange is happening to his friend. Comrade is not limited to material assistance. When Raskolnikov realizes that he is ashamed to be with his mother and sister, he asks Razumikhin to be with them and support his family. Rodion could completely rely on his friend, and he generously supported Raskolnikov as best he could.