{"id":"01KFE0DX41T2Z24PV546Z43E60","cid":"bafkreibxl5nj7fu5fuzlc4qym2g56oqo6vtff4mvaibkliwn2lfuv3euyi","type":"file","properties":{"cid":"bafkreifgkhuuycqbiocxp4gp52gnfhdqjec32hrv4lf6xp47fnz7mgmgge","content_type":"image/jpeg","filename":"crimepunishment00dostiala_page_0255.jpg","key":"pdf-page-1768923001317-4rpm1tlz7k7","label":"crimepunishment00dostiala_page_0255.jpg","page_number":255,"pdf_type":"born_digital","size":219298,"text":"CRIME AND PUNISHME N'T 247\nRaskolnikov smiled again. He saw the point at once, and\nknew where they wanted to drive him. He decided to take up\nthe challenge.\n\"That wasn't quite my contention,\" he began simply and\nmodestly. \"Yet I admit that you have stated it almost cor-\nrectly; perhaps, if you like, perfectly so.\" (It almost gave him\npleasure to admit this.) \"The only difference is that I don't\ncontend that extraordinary people are always bound to commit\nbreaches of morals, as you call it. In fact, I doubt whether such\nan argument could be published. I simply hinted that an 'ex-\ntraordinary' man has the right . . . that is not an official right,\nbut an inner right to decide in his own conscience to overstep . . .\ncertain obstacles, and only in caSe it is essential for the practical\nfulfilment of his idea (sometimes, perhaps, of benefit to the\nwhole of humanity). You say that my article isn't definite; I\nam ready to make it as clear as I can. Perhaps I am right in\nthinking you want me to; very well. I maintain that if the dis-\ncoveries ofKepler and Newton could not have been made\nknown except by sacrificing the lives of one, a dozen, a hundred,\nor more men, Newton would have had the right, would indeed\nhave been in duty bound ... to eliminate the dozen or the hun-\ndred men for the sake of making his discoveries known to the\nwhole of humanity. But it does not follow from that that New-\nton had a right to murder people right and left and to steal\nevery day in the market. Then, I remember, I maintain in my\narticle that all . . . well, legislators and leaders of men, such as\nLycurgus, Solon, Mahomet, Napoleon, and so on, were all with-\nout exception criminals, from the very fact that, making a new\nlaw, they transgressed the ancient one, handed down from their\nancestors and held sacred by the people, and they did not stop\nshort at bloodshed either, if that bloodshed — often of innocent\npersons fighting bravely in defence of ancient law — were of use\nto their cause. It's remarkable, in fact, that the majority, indeed,\nof these benefactors and leaders of humanity were guilty of ter-\nrible carnage. In short, I maintain that all great men or even\nmen a little out of the common, that is to say capable of giving\nsome new word, must from their very nature be criminals —\nmore or less, of course. Otherwise it's hard for them to get outof the common rut; and to remain in the common rut is what\nthey can't submit to, from their very nature again, and to my","text_extracted_at":"2026-01-20T15:30:01.317Z","text_extracted_by":"pdf-processor","text_has_content":true,"text_source":"born_digital","uploaded":true},"relationships":[{"peer":"01KFCZZ05FKVDDMJJV3YE9Q4WH","peer_label":"crimepunishment00dostiala.pdf","peer_type":"file","predicate":"derived_from"},{"peer":"01KESYJX0Z6XE0HWTS5N3SDG0B","peer_label":"The Classics","peer_type":"collection","predicate":"collection"}],"ver":2,"created_at":"2026-01-20T15:30:02.295Z","ts":"2026-01-20T15:30:03.475Z","edited_by":{"method":"manual","user_id":"01KFCZWTBNJH4WFMS8354919KY"}}