Modern Philosophy 1
Introduction to The Death of Ivan Ilyich
The Death of Ivan Ilyich, first published in 1886, is considered one of the classics of Russian literature. Although a work of fiction, it demonstrates how literature intersects philosophy. In the dialogue Phaedo Socrates states that “... the one aim of those who practice philosophy in the proper manner is to practice for dying and death” (Five Dialogues, p. 101). In this respect, The Death of Ivan Ilyich shows that literature is an important part of philosophy. Moreover, literature has the advantage of avoiding abstraction. In the Apology, Socrates blithely discusses various possibilities of death, but Tolstoy’s work describes the horror and the “indecency” of death viscerally. One has the uncanny feeling that death is more “real” in the work of fiction than it is in Plato’s dialogue.
The novel begins by portraying characters who, though living in the usual sense of the word, appear to be just as dead as Ivan Ilyich. They mechanically perform rituals and they are fixated on appearances. For example, consider one of Ivan Ilyich’s former friends going through the motions to console Ilyich’s wife at her husband’s funeral:
Pyotr Ivanovich knew that, as there he had had to cross himself, so here he had to press her hand, sigh, and say: “Believe me!” And so he did. And, having done that, he felt that the result achieved was the desired one... (p. 43).
Ivanovich is more concerned about doing what is expected — what one “has to do” around other people — than the fact that his friend has died. There is also the fact that he himself, and Ivan Ilyich’s other colleagues, will die someday, but this is denied. The following describes the reaction of Ivan Ilyich’s former colleagues upon hearing news of his death:
Apart from the reflections [Ivan Ilyich’s] death called up in each of them about the transfers and possible changes at work that might result from it, the very fact of the death of a close acquaintance called up in all those who heard of it, as always, a feeling of joy that it was he who was dead and not I (p. 40).
In short, it is easy to deceive oneself about death by telling oneself that it is only other people who die. Similarly, it is also easy to admit that one will die, but to assume at the same time that death is always an event that will occur at some distant point in the future — possibly “next year” but never today. This illusion is described as follows in The Alchemy of Happiness: “[the world] pretends that it will always remain with you, while, as a matter of fact, it is slipping away from you, moment by moment, and bidding you farewell, like a shadow which seems stationary, but is actually always moving” (p. 29). Even though it is inexorably approaching, death can be ignored and one can succumb to the fantasy that life in this world will never end.
Before his fatal injury, Ivan Ilyich’s life “went on as he believed life ought to go: easily, pleasantly, and decently. He got up at nine, had coffee, read the newspaper, then put on his uniform and went to court...” (p. 58). He saw himself as one who was “decent” — i.e., he followed social norms and he strove to be accepted and approved by society. At the same time, he and his family fended off “ragtag people” that they considered to be inferior (p. 60). In short, he confused his role in society — his social image — with himself.
However, after receiving a small bruise while hanging a curtain he develops a persistent pain. Gradually, day by day, he realizes that his pain is “inexorably drawing him somewhere” (p. 65). False hope, much of it provided by the practitioners of medical science, eventually disappears and he can no longer deny his impending death. For most of his life he had been deceived by the slow progress of time, but now he sees that “the shadow” is moving — i.e., the world is bidding him farewell. It is only near the end, when he is face-to-face with the undeniable fact of death, that he “looks into his soul” and listens to an inner voice (pp. 83-84). Thus, for Ivan Ilyich impending death broke the illusion that life was simply about decency, easiness, and pleasure.
In general, we can say that these are the first steps toward self-knowledge: look into yourself, question yourself, listen to what you are telling yourself — even (or especially) if the latter is not what you want to hear. The Alchemy of Happiness states that self-knowledge is more important than pleasure and society; similarly, in the Apology Socrates states that wisdom, truth, and the soul are more important than wealth and reputation (Five Dialogues, p. 34). For most of his life, Ivan Ilyich gave priority to the latter instead of the former. But, once he stopped lying to himself, he underwent a radical change, and the last few words that he speaks to his family are redeeming. By facing the fact that life in this world is not permanent, we see life and our role in the world differently.
— A. Pasqualoni, 2020 (Revised February 2021)
Introduction to Berdyaev’s Philosophy of Hell
Nikolai Berdyaev (1874-1948) was a Russian philosopher who wrote extensively on ethics and the philosophy of religion. In the excerpt from The Destiny of Man, he argues against the belief that hell is eternal. In his view, hell exists subjectively — i.e., hell is not “objectively real” (p. 269). Accordingly, the distinction between subjective and objective plays an important role in Berdyaev’s philosophy. He states that “Hell belongs entirely to the subjective and not the objective sphere” (p. 268). This raises the following question: What, for Berdyaev, is the difference between subjective and objective?
For the text we are considering, it may be helpful to look at it this way: something is subjective if it is experienced by a human subject, while something is objective if it exists independently of thought, feeling, and belief. For example, when a dentist drills a patient’s tooth, it is the patient — i.e., “the subject” — and not the dentist who experiences pain. The experience of pain exists only in the mind of the subject, but the chair, the drill, and the office itself are all “objective” in the sense that they exist independently of the patient’s thoughts, feelings, and beliefs. Even when the office is empty, the chair, the drill, etc. continue to exist; but the patient’s pain cannot exist apart from the patient. In other words, the patient’s suffering is subjective and not objective.
Berdyaev argues that hell is only subjective. It is a particular kind of human experience. Hell is not unlike a terrifying hallucination or a nightmare; it is a manifestation of intense fear and suffering, but it does not exist independently of the person who experiences it.
If hell is an experience, what kind of experience is it? For Berdyaev, hell is a torment that appears to be endless: “In our life on earth it is given us to experience torments that appear to us to go on for ever, that are not for a moment, for an hour or a day, but seem to last an infinity” (p. 269). In this claim the key words are “appear” and “seem.” With hell, appearances are deceiving. If we recall Ivan Ilyich’s last days, there were moments when he feared that his pain and suffering would not end (see for example page 82). But, in time, Ivan Ilyich did overcome his pain. Similarly, for Berdyaev, human suffering — regardless of whether it is physical or psychological — only takes place in time; i.e., it is temporal and not eternal, finite and not infinite.
Thus, every individual’s experience of suffering ceases sooner or later, without exception. Objectively, eternal suffering does not exist. However, subjectively — i.e., from the standpoint of the sufferer — suffering may appear to be endless. When one is in hell, its temporary nature is forgotten. This recalls Ivan Ilyich’s dread of being drawn into “the abyss” (p. 69); he feared that death would lead him into a bottomless pit, something without an end.
According to Berdyaev, hell is “a phantasm, a nightmare which cannot be eternal but may be experienced by man as endless” (p. 269). Thus, Berdyaev argues that the fear of endless torment is an illusory fear. Since God is both loving and merciful, He would not allow any of his creatures — even the presumably “wicked” ones — to suffer eternally. For Berdyaev, although torment certainly exists, the idea of everlasting torment is man’s invention; it is man’s way of inflicting suffering on himself.
— A. Pasqualoni, 2020 (Revised February 2021)
Texts and Reading Assignments
Week 4:
The reading assignment has been posted in the course schedule of the syllabus.
Week 5:
Excerpt from “Hell” in The Destiny of Man by Nikolai Berdyaev (PDF)
Source: The Destiny of Man by Nikolai Berdyaev. 4th ed. Translated from the Russian by Natalie Duddington. London: G. Bles, 1954.
Quotations for Discussion 4 (Week 4)
Quotations from The Death of Ivan Ilyich:
1. “He was between the two — an intelligent, lively, pleasant, and decent man.” (p. 47)
2. “The consciousness of his power, the possibility of destroying any man he wanted to destroy...all this was a cause for joy...” (p. 53)
3. “In all this one had to know how to exclude all that was raw, vital — which always disrupts the regular flow of official business...” (p. 58)
4. “People’s illness and people’s health became Ivan Ilyich’s main interests.” (p. 63)
5. “It was impossible to deceive himself: something dreadful, new, and so significant that nothing more significant had ever happened in his life, was being accomplished in Ivan Ilyich.” (p. 64)
6. “...the awareness that he had put off an important, intimate matter, which he would take up once he had finished, never left him.” (p. 68)
7. “So where will I be, when there’s no me?” (p 68)
8. “It’s death, yet I think about my appendix.” (p. 69)
9. “And Caius is indeed mortal, and it’s right that he die, but for me, Vanya, Ivan Ilyich, with all my feelings and thoughts — for me it’s another matter.” (p. 70)
10. “He tried to go back to his former ways of thinking, which had screened him formerly from the thought of death.” (p. 71)
11. “...they would disagree, contradict him, he would argue, get angry; but all was well, because he did not remember about it, it was not seen.” (p. 72)
12. “He would go to his study, lie down, and again remain alone with it.” (p. 72)
13. “The main torment for Ivan Ilyich was the lie, that lie for some reason acknowledged by everyone...” (p. 75)
14. “Gerasim alone did not lie, everything showed that he alone understood what it was all about, and did not find it necessary to conceal it...” (p. 76)
15. ‘ “Would you care for tea, sir?” ’ (p. 77)
16. “Always the same thing. A drop of hope glimmers, then a sea of despair begins to rage...” (p. 78)
17. “...he knew very well they were all lies and why they were lies.” (p. 79)
18. “He felt that this lie surrounding him was so entangled that it was hard to sort anything out...” (p. 80)
19. “...instead of the real question of life and death, which now alone confronted him, there re-emerged the question of the kidney and the appendix...” (p. 80)
20. “This silence had to be broken somehow.” (p. 82)
21. “Again minute followed minute, hour hour, always the same...” (p. 82)
22. “He did not expect an answer and wept that there was not and could not be an answer.” (p. 83)
23. “And this deadly service, and these worries about money, and that for a year, and two, and ten, and twenty — and all of it the same.” (p. 84)
24. “...why, what for, all this horror?” (p. 85)
25. “Life, a series of ever-increasing sufferings, races faster and faster towards its end, the most dreadful suffering.” (p. 86)
26. “The further back it went, the more life there was.” (p. 86)
27. ‘ “To admit that is quite impossible,” he said to himself, his lips smiling, as if there were someone to see that smile and be deceived by it. ’ (p. 87)
28. “His work, and his living conditions, and his family, and these social and professional interests — all might have been not right.” (p. 88)
29. “...more terrible than his physical sufferings were his moral sufferings, and these were his chief torment.” (p. 88)
30. “The moment he answered his wife, he realized that he was lost, that there was no return, that the end had come, the final end, and his doubt was still not resolved, it still remained doubt.” (p.89)
Questions to consider for your first post:
Since we are dealing with a work of fiction, the format of your first post is different. Here are some questions to consider while discussing the quotation you have chosen:
i) Discuss the context of the quote. What is the significance of the quote in the story? What does it tell us about Ivan Ilyich or the people around him? What does it tell us about death and how people respond to death? If the quote contains words spoken or thought by a character (e.g., Ivan Ilyich or one of his servants), consider the state of mind of the character. For example, if the words are spoken by Ivan Ilyich, is he in a state of denial or is he distracting himself? If so, why?
ii) Discuss your own reaction to the quote. Did you find it moving or did it reveal something to you? Alternatively, do you think the quote gives a false impression of death or the way people respond to it?
Please choose a quote that has not been discussed by another student — see the Discussion Guidelines for additional information.
Quotations for Discussion 5 (Week 5)
Quotations from “Hell” in Nikolai Berdyaev’s The Destiny of Man:
1. “The soul conducts an inner dialogue with itself about hell, and neither side has the final say.” (p. 266)
2. “All that a man does out of fear of hell and not out of love of God and of perfect life has no religious significance whatever...” (p. 266)
3. “One can look at hell from the human and from the divine point of view.” (p. 268)
4. “It is impossible to be reconciled to the thought that God could have created the world and man if He foresaw hell...” (p. 268)
5. “The idea of an objectified hell as a special sphere of eternal life is altogether intolerable, unthinkable and, indeed, incompatible with faith in God.” p 268)
6. “Hell as a place of retribution for the wicked...is a fairy tale.” (p. 268)
7. “A God who deliberately allows the existence of eternal torments is not God at all but is more like the devil.” (p. 268)
8. “To admit hell would be to deny God.” (p. 268)
9. “...the only eternity is that of the Kingdom of God and there is no other reality on a level with it.” (p. 269)
10. “[Hell] is due to the subject shutting himself up in his self-centered suffering and being unable to escape from it into objective reality.” (p. 269)
11. “In itself hell is illusory, phantasmagorical and unreal, but it may be the greatest psychological subjective reality for the individual.” (p. 269)
12. “It is a mistake to imagine that hell as punishment and retribution endured for ever ... is the result of Divine judgment.” (p. 275)
13. ‘ “True believers” send “heretics” to hell in accordance with human and not with Divine justice. ’ (p. 276)
14. “The last will be first, and the first last...” (p. 276)
15. “It is utterly inadmissible that men should usurp God’s right to judge.” (p. 276)
16. “His judgment lies beyond our distinctions between good and evil.” (p. 276)
17. “It is hard to understand the psychology of pious Christians who calmly accept the fact that their neighbors, friends and relatives will perhaps be damned.” (p. 276)
18. “I cannot resign myself to the fact that the man with whom I am drinking tea is doomed to eternal torments.” (p. 276)
19. “The true moral change is a change of attitude towards the “wicked” and the doomed, a desire that they too should be saved...” (p. 276)
20. “Paradise is impossible for me if the people I love, my friends or relatives or mere acquaintances, will be in hell...” (p. 276)
21. “Hell is nothing other than complete separation from God.” (p. 277)
22. “It is not what God will do to me that is terrible, but what I will do to myself.” (p. 277)
23. “The idea of hell must be completely freed from all associations with criminal law transferred to the heavenly world.” (p. 278)
24. “Hell will not come in eternity, it will remain in time.” (p. 278)
25. “In the spiritual world we cannot think of the devil as outside the human soul, he is immanent in it...” (p. 278)
26. “The idea of hell has been turned into an instrument of intimidation, of religious and moral terrorism.” (p. 278)
27. “Paradoxically it might be said that the horror of hell possesses man when he submits his final destiny to his own judgment and not to that of God.” (p. 278)
28. “It is impossible...to remain in time for ever: one can only remain in time for a time.” (p. 279)
29. “There is something hideous and morally revolting in the idea of eternal torments as a just retribution for the crimes and sins of a short moment of life.” (p. 279)
30. “Eternal damnation as the result of things done in a short period of time is one of the most disgusting of human nightmares.” (p. 279)
31. “The doctrine of reincarnation...involves...the nightmare of endless incarnations, of infinite wanderings along dark passages...” (p. 279)
32. “The life in our world between birth and death is merely a small fragment of the human destiny...” (p. 279)
Please choose a quote that has not been discussed by another student — see the Discussion Guidelines for additional information.
Supplementary Material
Lectures and notes have been posted on the Video Lectures page.