The Grand Inquisitor Meets Free Information

To Liz and Jon: The way I read the parable, I think you may be putting too much emphasis on a literal interpretation of the bread/freedom dichotomy. "Bread" in the grand executioner story represents what Dostoyevsky calls miracle - "But see Thou these stones in this parched and barren wilderness? Turn them into bread, and mankind shall run after thee like a flock of sheep, grateful and obedient, though forever trembling, lest Thou withdraw Thy hand and deny them Thy bread."

The miracle is both the providence of the bread AND its miraculous nature; man is neither intended nor required to understand its creation. In the context of the story, I read the bread (physical security, etc) versus freedom dichotomy posed in the initial quote as intended to be false and superficial: both the Grand Inquisitor and Christ know that there will be bread in either case. The true dichotomy the Inquisitor is proposing is between miracle and freedom from miracle, divine care and human responsibility. The question is not whether there will be enough bread, but whether the greater part of mankind is strong enough or willing to bear freedom from the miracle of its providence.

In this context, it seems to me like Dana is asking the important question, and one that I feel is deeply relevant to the class. Our solutions to the problems of privacy and authority on the internet have largely fallen either into a category of miracle (providing solutions that give people "bread" without requiring them to think too deeply about the providence of the gift), or into requiring an acceptance of the responsibility of freedom (asking them to use encrypted e-mail, or to not use phones with proprietary operating systems). The parable of the Grand Inquisitor asks if people will ever willingly accept the latter, and if we choose the former, are we really capable of "giving" freedom, or are we simply replacing one flavor of miraculous providence (read: facebook) with another?

-- TheodoreSmith - 12 May 2009