Raskolnikov's theory in the novel "Crime and Punishment" by Dostoevsky

"Crime and Punishment" of Dostoevsky is a detective novel about a crime commited by Rodion Raskolnikov (Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov). 

But why he commited the crime? The truth is that Raskolnikov murdered the old pawnbroker Alyona Ivanovna and her sister Lizaveta in order to prove his theory.

What is Raskolnikov's theory about?

Raskolnikov's theory in "Crime and Punishment" may seem complicated but it is quite simple. He believed that there are two types of men in the world:

• men who are ordinary. They serve as a material.
• men who are extraordinary, who do something new and develope this world leading "ordinary" people.

This is how Raskolnikov explained his theory to Porfiry Petrovich, the murder investigator:

"I only believe in my leading idea that men are in general divided by a law of nature into two categories, inferior (ordinary), that is, so to say, material that serves only to reproduce its kind, and men who have the gift or the talent to utter a new word... 

... The first category, generally speaking, are men conservative in temperament and law-abiding; they live under control and love to be controlled. To my thinking it is their duty to be controlled, because that’s their vocation, and there is nothing humiliating in it for them.  

The second category all transgress the law; they are destroyers or disposed to destruction according to their capacities. The crimes of these men are of course relative and varied; for the most part they seek in very varied ways the destruction of the present for the sake of the better. But if such a one is forced for the sake of his idea to step over a corpse or wade through blood, he can...

...The first category is always the man of the present, the second the man of the future. The first preserve the world and people it, the second move the world and lead it to its goal. Each class has an equal right to exist...

 ...I simply hinted that an ‘extraordinary’ man has the right … that is not an official right, but an inner right to decide in his own conscience to overstep … certain obstacles, and only in case it is essential for the practical fulfilment of his idea (sometimes, perhaps, of benefit to the whole of humanity)...

This is how Porfiry Petrovich puts Raskolnikov's theory in other words: 

"...In his article all men are divided into ‘ordinary’ and ‘extraordinary.’  

Ordinary men have to live in submission, have no right to transgress the law, because, don’t you see, they are ordinary. 

But extraordinary men have a right to commit any crime and to transgress the law in any way, just because they are extraordinary..." 

This is how Svidrigailov explains Raskolnikov's theory in other words:

"...A special little theory came in too--a theory of a sort--dividing mankind, you see, into material and superior persons, that is persons to whom the law does not apply owing to their superiority, who make laws for the rest of mankind, the material, that is. It's all right as a theory, une théorie comme une autre.  

Napoleon attracted him tremendously, that is, what affected him was that a great many men of genius have not hesitated at wrongdoing, but have overstepped the law without thinking about it. He seems to have fancied that he was a genius too--that is, he was convinced of it for a time.  

He has suffered a great deal and is still suffering from the idea that he could make a theory, but was incapable of boldly overstepping the law, and so he is not a man of genius. And that's humiliating for a young man of any pride, in our day especially...."

Why did dRaskolnikov's theory fail? 

Obviously Raskolnikov's theory in "Crime and Punishment" failed right after he commited the crime. He realised that he can not live with what he did. And he discovered that his theory was doomed to failure. Why? 

Because, according to his theory. "extraordinary" people never ask themselves whether they can or can not do something, "extraordinary people" never doubt before they make a step. 

Since Raskolnikov was asking himsef wthere he was capable of murdering or not, he already "failed" to be exraordinary person in his own eyes. 

For example, Dostoevski himself calls Raskolnikov's theory a "strange" one (he mentioned it in one of his letters),

Of course, it was a strange theory, not humane and awful. But unfortunately, this theory was the reason for Raskolnikov's crime.

These are the quotations about Raskolnikov´s theory from the novel "Crime and Punishment" of Dostoevsky,