

Dostoevsky on the dangers of science - brox
http://thomas.broxrost.com/2008/10/13/dostoevsky-on-the-dangers-of-science/

======
ii
It's amazing how Dostoevsky captured the dark essence of nerdiness in this
story.

Here's the original for those who know Russian:

Его пожирала страсть самая глубокая, самая ненасытимая, истощающая всю жизнь
человека и не выделяющая таким существам, как Ордынов, ни одного угла в сфере
другой, практической, житейской деятельности. Эта страсть была — наука. Она
снедала покамест его молодость, медленным, упоительным ядом отравляла ночной
покой, отнимала у него здоровую пищу и свежий воздух, которого никогда не
бывало в его душном углу, и Ордынов в упоении страсти своей не хотел замечать
того. Он был молод и покамест не требовал бо’льшего. Страсть сделала его
младенцем для внешней жизни и уже навсегда неспособным заставить посторониться
иных добрых людей, когда придет к тому надобность, чтоб отмежевать себе между
них хоть какой-нибудь угол. Наука иных ловких людей — капитал в руках; страсть
Ордынова была обращенным на него же оружием.

------
gruseom
Dostoevsky isn't talking about the "dangers of science" as such. He even goes
out of his way to make that clear in the last sentence.

Seems to me more like he's interested in what happens when the intellect runs
amok and is unbalanced by other aspects of human nature. Although I haven't
read this story, that would be consistent with the rest of his work (Crime and
Punishment, for example, which now that I think of it _really_ goes into the
dark side of "nerdiness").

Edit: Rereading the passage, I don't think that's really what's going on here
either. This character seems naive and almost helpless, and the tone is more
compassionate than critical.

~~~
ii
Read the story.

Edit: I agree that he isn't talking about the "dangers of science". It's more
like "Nerd in the city"

------
sfk
Fantastic piece of writing, thanks for posting this.

------
Create
This is just the same thing as Faust: selling your soul for science is a
devil's bargain by definition. Scientists aren't smart enough not to do it ;)

------
mtw
is this criticizing hackers and/or programmers?

~~~
biohacker42
I am not sure it is so much criticizing as much as it is simply describing.

Being passionate about something to the exclusion of every thing else is a
common human folly.

That something being knowledge is common for us hackers.

~~~
mtw
the excerpt uses very grim words for something which is just "describing".

that said, I agree with your last 2 sentences

------
maurycy
What are the arguments actually? The fact that Ordynov was robbed by wholesome
food?

Dostoevsky's rubbish, as always.

~~~
gruseom
If you think a novelist's job is to present "arguments", I can see why
Dostoevsky is not for you.

~~~
hugh
But you'd love Tolstoy! The last third of War and Peace breaks off every five
pages so Tolstoy can argue against the "great men" view of history. Then he
has a fifty-page appendix at the end in which he reiterates his case, just in
case you didn't get it the first time.

It's especially dull, since nobody really believes the viewpoint he's arguing
against any more.

