In Notes from the Underground by Dostoevsky, the Underground Man proposes a conception of free action radically different from that of Kant. While Kant thinks that an agent does not act freely unless he acts for some reason, the Underground Man seems to take the opposite position: the only way to be truly autonomous is to reject this notion of freedom and assert one's right to act on their own. no reason. I will argue that the Underground Man's notion of freedom builds on Kant's, in that it requires self-awareness in decision making. But he departs from Kant when he states that acting for a reason is not enough and only provides an illusion of freedom. Faced with two options: deluding oneself about one's freedom (like most men) or submitting to the ?wall? (a form of determinism), the Underground Man chooses an unlikely third option: an "answer." I will end this article by asking whether this "answer" manages to escape the system of nature it desperately seeks to avoid. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay I will begin by explaining how the Underground Man argument builds on Kant's notion of freedom. Throughout the work, the Underground Man speaks of conscience. He states that consciousness is a disease and that most men (fortunately) are not fully conscious (10). This constant reference to consciousness is reminiscent of Kant's notion of autonomous action. Kant believes that human beings decide which actions to perform as a result of self-conscious reflection. That is, when they have a desire, they must first step back from that desire, examine possible courses of action, and then approve the desire as worthy of satisfaction before they can act on it. If people acted without this kind of reflection, their actions would not be truly free: freedom depends on the individual's conscious approval, on a temporary removal from one's immediate desires. So far, the Underground Man and Kant agree. However, Kant believes that the approval of desires consists in having a reason to act on that desire, a reason based on what we perceive as a good. The type of good is not specified: it could range from the satisfaction of selfish goals to the improvement of the human race. The important thing is that we establish ourselves on which type of good to base our reasons. Free action is impossible if we do not independently formulate our reasons; more specifically, we must decide for ourselves what is a good reason to act. While the Underground Man agrees that we must formulate our own reasons, he rejects the idea that reasons based on any concept of perceived good can ever truly be ours. This rejection of reasons as a basis for autonomy stems from his belief that freedom is virtually impossible in a largely deterministic and evolutionary universe, where everything is determined by the “laws of nature” to which he constantly refers. The Underground Man believes that the feeling of freedom generated by acting for a reason rather than acting blindly is an illusion. Does he perhaps say of men of limited consciousness that they mistake immediate and secondary causes for primary ones, and thus convince themselves more quickly and easily than others that they have discovered an indisputable foundation for their activity? (19). In other words, these 'men of action' convince themselves that their choices are based on a superior faculty, on reasons that they formulate autonomously (primary causes). However, their action is actually based on causes determined from outside, byinstincts, biology, etc. (immediate or secondary causes). If we had the intellectual capacity, all human reason and desire could be predicted in advance, "calculated on paper according to various laws of nature which man will never discover" (28). He describes these men of action as those "born from the bosom of nature" (13). The Underground Man believes that everything we perceive as "good" has been intended by nature for the preservation of the species, the survival of the individual, or other natural purposes. Therefore, although we may feel that our reasons are the result of a higher faculty, this feeling is an illusion. Nature provides us with this illusion because, as individuals with a higher consciousness, we do not want to realize that all our actions are determined by reasons that go beyond our specific existence. As the Underground Man describes him, "Man has continually proved to himself that he is a man and not an organ grinder" (31). That is, man wants to believe that freedom is possible, that it is not just a tool to preserve the species or to act as nature intends. However, most men have a "limited conscience" and easily succumb to the illusion of freedom: they do not examine their reasons with sufficient rigor and quickly convince themselves that their reasons are their own. He often compares man to an animal: this type of gentleman heads straight for his target, like a mad bull with lowered horns (13). Men of limited conscience are able to convince themselves that their reasons aim at some good that goes beyond that intended by nature. This is what nature wanted, because if men realized the futility of their action, they would remain paralyzed. They would no longer act in a way that preserves the species, and the human species would become extinct - so a higher level of consciousness is a "disease". This is the disease that consumes the Underground Man, who "did not arise." from the bosom of nature but from a retort" (13). Having a higher level of consciousness, he sees that the ultimate causes of all reasons are external. Consequently, he has two choices: he can delude himself about his freedom as others do, or he can submit to the laws of nature and recognize that freedom is an illusion. The first option is clearly impossible, since his heightened consciousness "manages to accumulate around itself so much further disgust in terms of questions and doubts that, willy-nilly, it has gathered around itself a sort of fatal swamp" (14). However, he also refuses to submit to the laws of nature, to act unconsciously, and to respond immediately and thoughtlessly to all desires or whims. Therefore, he makes a desperate attempt to exercise his freedom in the only way he believes possible: by deliberately acting contrary to any reason that might be perceived as "good". He thus hopes to realize the supreme good, the "most advantageous advantage" of man: his individuality and autonomy (23). But what exactly does this activity consist of? How does the Underground Man frame this "response"? He does not provide many specific examples of truly free action, but defines it primarily as a negative concept. He views the response as acting against everything he thinks nature intended: he takes any impulse that people very often avoid and attempts to derive pleasure from it (such as in the midst of a toothache or being humiliated). So not only does he act against nature, but he takes pleasure where it seems most unlikely. But one wonders whether this type of action is truly autonomous. In his specific attempts to defy nature, his actions seem to have an exclusive basis in the natural causes he so despises. Remember a jealous ex-lover who, in an attempt to demonstrate his lack of interest in her.