Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Deep Analysis of Anna Karenina Part Four: Divorce and the Neuroscience of Free Will (Chapters 4-5) (Patreon)

Published:
2021-03-10 19:01:20
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

This lecture is looking at the neuroscience of free will, divorce laws in 19th Century Russia, male vs female infidelity, the psychological principle of "face" and politeness theory, and the theory of linguistic relativity (language influences thought). We'll also see Anna and her husband face off.

As always, I've bolded and timestamped the most important parts you might want to jump to if you find yourself lacking tons of time.

  • 0:00 Part Four Chapter Four
  • 1:35 wrath and the seven deadly sins
  • 3:29 societal expectations
  • 5:20 the theory of linguistic relativity (language influences thought)
  • 6:40 the psychological concept of “face” and politeness theory
  • 8:30 Dostoyevsky and Rousseau
  • 9:30 self-esteem, ego, self-preservation
  • 12:25 divorce law in 19th Century Russia
  • 17:00 male infidelity vs female infidelity (embedded cultural double-standards)
  • 19:30 “You call it cruelty when a husband offers his wife freedom”
  • 21:00 a psychologically complex interaction between Anna and Alexei
  • 21:40 the neuroscience of free will

Let me know any thoughts you might have so far, either on the topics we've touched upon or things that have occurred to you during your reading. You've been contributing some really great ideas, for which I am deeply grateful.

Happy reading!

Files

Previews only

Deep Analysis of Anna Karenina Part Four: Divorce and the Neuroscience of Free Will (Chapters 4-5)

0:00 Part Four Chapter Four 1:35 wrath and the seven deadly sins 3:29 societal expectations 5:20 the theory of linguistic relativity (language influences thought) 6:40 the psychological concept of “face” and politeness theory 8:30 Dostoyevsky and Rousseau 9:30 self-esteem, ego, self-preservation 12:25 divorce law in 19th Century Russia 17:00 male infidelity vs female infidelity (embedded cultural double-standards) 19:30 “You call it cruelty when a husband offers his wife freedom” 21:00 a psychologically complex interaction between Anna and Alexei 21:40 the neuroscience of free will

Comments

Anonymous

I don’t think Anna was in a loveless marriage. I believe Karenin did love her, he probably did not express his love the way she expected. It’s true that Karenin, fights against emotions and feelings with all his might and Anna is justified in calling him a machine, but I fiercely believe that he loved her in his own way. Sometimes when people whom we love do not conform or behavior according to our understanding of what is love or what it means to love, it is easy to think they don’t love us. But maybe they love us in their own way, and I think that is what is happening here. Anna wants someone who expresses grand sentiments like Vronksy who said “I must be where you are..” and so on, but is that love? Or is love what Karenin does for her? When he says she can continue seeing Vronksy but just not under his roof? Maybe Karenin tells himself it’s because he wants it to appear normal to outsiders but maybe it’s because he loves her and cannot be without her even if it means living with her while she is in love with someone else.

Margaret H

Thank you for this very interesting session Ben. Anna is coming more into focus and all the constraints of her life, previously vague and comfortable, now are intolerable with the development of intense passion, an entirely new experience for her and she is overwhelmed. I do believe she has free will. It's impossible for her to be detached and co-operative. She is petulant and childlike, behaviour consistent with her life of indulgence and her restless, previously unfulfilled personality. Certainly a sad marriage. Karenin has deep understanding of the issues as shown by his efforts to manage the situation . I agree that he has loved her.

Martin

I may well be being overly dismissive here, and if I am I apologize, but when I hear arguments against free will, I think how curious it seems that one would not only espouse such a view, but also promote it. To what end? Does the advocate believe he is acting on his own volition? How futile it seems to attempt to convince another of the correctness of one’s views if the other is incapable of volition. It is an interesting subject to be sure, but limited in its application, is it not? To say that man does not have free will presents a perfectly unactionable worldview, wouldn’t you say? In other words, yes, at times we act without the exercise of our own volition, but, in my opinion, that does not mean that we have no volition, or freedom of will. In Anna Karenina, I agree with Sharon that Anna at times refuses responsibility while saying that she cannot do otherwise, when she is simply being selfish. At the same time, listening to Ben’s talk on divorce in Anna’s time, one can certainly see how she would feel that her life is dictated by others and not herself. Her freedom is definitely limited by forces beyond her control or influence, and she is clearly overwhelmed by this fact, but she eventually allows this to so completely cloud her judgement that she finally decides that she has no choice at all. I pity her, and even though I see how she arrived at her final conclusion, I believe she cooperated in her demise by embracing and asserting her helplessness. In that, she had a choice. Tragically, she chose poorly. “There, but for the grace of God . . . ”