The novel Crime and Punishment is a long debate on the topic of what constitutes a crime and how it should be punished. Dostoevsky presents many differing opinions on the subject through various characters. There is one central crime in the novel, the murder of Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna by Rodion Raskolnikov, but there are many other crimes described along the way to further the discussion. The main questions raised repeatedly in the novel have to do with scale. Is there a justified crime? Are some crimes worse than others and where is the line drawn? Raskolnikov presents a very clear point of view on these topics and continues to defend this position in the face of many other points of view presented by the other characters. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The debate initially focuses on the crime of murder, since it is the first crime we witness. Raskolnikov believes that some murders are indeed justified and expands on this point throughout the novel. He considers the murder committed by him to be completely justified because Alyona Ivanovna was a pawnbroker who took advantage of the poor and caused a lot of suffering in the lives of many people. He believes it is right to kill one when it benefits many. He repeatedly refers to her as a "louse" to justify her death. As the novel progresses, he also starts trying to justify it with statements like "it wasn't a human being I killed, it was a principle!" (Dostoevsky, 274). Raskolnikov's argument becomes known to the other characters through an article he wrote while still a student. This article divides the population into two groups, those who are a little above the rules and are allowed to commit justified crimes, and those who are common, who are supposed to live like sheep and just blindly follow the laws. In a key scene in the novel, Porfiry Petrovich and Razumikhin argue about whether criminal behavior originates in nature or nurture, which leads Porfiry to bring up the article to provoke Raskolnikov into the debate as well. Raskolnikov explains that "the 'extraordinary' man has... his right to... overcome certain obstacles... in case the realization of his idea - sometimes perhaps salutary for all humanity - requires it" (Dostoevsky, 259). . He then emphasizes that extraordinary people do not have the right to kill at will; they can kill only when necessary to achieve their goal. This debate also sheds light on two other perspectives on crime, as demonstrated by Razumikhin and Porfiry. Razumikhin vehemently denounces the idea that all crimes arise exclusively from environmental factors and are not at all attributed to the nature of the criminal, while Porfiry argues that the environment is essential in the creation of criminals. The question of the scope of a crime appears to be based on a few factors. Raskolnikov claims that “extraordinary” people can kill when the killings benefit the rest of humanity. However, from what we see of the other crimes committed, it becomes clear that the worst crime in his opinion is exploitation. The people presented as the most vile are those who exploit others to further their own gain. The reason Raskolnikov feels justified in killing Alena is because she exploits the poor and takes advantage of those in bad situations. Later in the novel, Raskolnikov also meets Luzhin and Svidrigailov, both of whom have a completely callous attitude towards crime. Svidrigailov is said to have caused the deaths of many otherspeople and attempted to exploit Raskolnikov to gain access to Dunya. Luzhin attempts to exploit Sonya, to get revenge on Raskolnikov for helping break up his relationship with Dunya. Raskolnikov has a low opinion of both of these men and the way they exploit the innocent. Other characters in the book appear to be the “ordinary” people that Raskolnikov describes in his theory of crime. They follow the law and don't think it's right to go outside the law for any reason. Many of these characters are also very religious and therefore strongly believe in repentance and suffering for their sins. These characters include Sonya Marmeladova, Pulcheria Alexandrovna and Mikolka. All of them firmly believe that those who commit crimes should admit to them and be sent to prison so that they can suffer for their sins. A final point of view on crime is brought by Arkady Svidrigailov and Pyotr Luzhin, who seem to be insensitive towards crime and commit crimes without having any noble ideals behind them. Both are portrayed as more immoral than Raskolnikov and their crimes are worse than his. Svidrigailov takes advantage of young women and tries to force himself on Dunya and Petrovich tries to slander Sonya to get back at Dunya for rejecting him. Both of these crimes serve only selfish purposes and have no greater value for humanity, so Raskolnikov considers them unjustified and therefore, actually immoral crimes. Along with the many views of the crime we learn throughout the novel, there are several points of view. of punishment. Religious and “ordinary” people are the ones who outwardly worry most about punishment. When Raskolnikov first confesses his crime to Sonya, her first instinct is to tell him to announce it to the world and to accept his suffering so that he can repent. Their focus is on the sinful aspect of the crime, rather than the legal one. People must be punished for their sins in order for them to go to heaven, and this punishment involves suffering. This point of view even leads Mikolka to falsely confess to having killed the Ivanovnas, so that she can obtain suffering to get her life back on track. The characters who have committed crimes in the novel all show a tendency to punish themselves even though they got away with it. Raskolnikov spends the entire novel alternately terrified of being discovered and wanting to turn himself in. During this time he becomes deliriously ill due to the combination of guilt and fear, which is the first part of his punishment. He has the rather Lady Macbeth-like situation of seeing blood everywhere and often feeling covered in blood. He chooses to absolve himself of this guilt by helping others, which causes his illness to heal and the blood sightings to cease. In this way he repents of the crime without turning himself in and no longer feels any remorse for what he did. Meanwhile, Svidrigailov has also gotten away with several crimes and shows no signs of self-flagellation. In fact, he even boasts about his slights towards Raskolnikov and appears to have no desire to change until his meeting with Dunya. After this meeting, he also gives all his money to those he has hurt and then publicly kills himself. This public suicide is yet another example of atonement; it is a public admission of his guilt and an expression of his desire to no longer hurt others. Porfiry Petrovich uses the vision of self-flagellation punishment. As a detective, he is fascinated by the psychology of various people and uses psychology to lure criminals. He finds out that Raskolnikov is the one who actually committed the murder early on, but has no concrete evidence linking him to the.