relativism on Hamlet
The speaker of this statement is Hamlet. It appears in a conversation with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who visited Hamlet by Claudius’s order to spy on him. In this statement Hamlet is saying that because “good or bad” (relativism) depends on how people think, there is no mutual concept of “good or bad”. To Hamlet whether the world is to be seen as a full of confines and lies or not, it all depends on what people think about the world they are living. To Hamlet consequence of contemplation about what is right or wrong, or good or bad seems to be more important than the action itself. Action without the sense of morality is undesirable. Toward the end of the play Hamlet stop thinking about the validity of his motivation toward his action, and decide to let things go so much as “let God do the thinking” idea.Hamlet relates his action with relativism (being or seeming) in “To be, or not to be: that is the question: whether ‘tis nobler in the mind of suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms and arrows of outrageous fortune, and by opposing end them” (3.1.57). Here he is posing two choices
Here he refers to conscience as a function of determines the moral quality of action. He is no longer fear death or what may await him after death, and no longer restrained by conscience. The statement is “But that the dread of something after death, the undiscover’d country from whose bourn no traveller returns, puzzles the will” (3. In my opinion Hamlet’s idea of relativism (no mutual concept of relativism) seems extreme and unbalanced. By doing too much thinking he won’t be able to take an action, and he is well aware of it as in “thus conscience does make cowards of us all and thus the native hue of resolution is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought, and enterprises of great pith and moment with this regard their currents turn awry, and lose the name of action. What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason! How infinite in faculity! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an angel! -------- And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me” (2. Naturally the mutual concept of relativism doesn’t have much meaning to him. It seems to me that the tragedy events made him see what humans are capable of, ignoring the reason and persuade whatever their passion lead them to do even the action is totally immoral; to kill his own brother and marry his bother’s wife, so he became unable to trust human as well as the reason of human action. To Hamlet an action without concern for morality is not desirable. Above statements clearly shows that Hamlet is incapable of executing his revenge.
Common topics in this essay:
Hamlet Claudius’s,
Government Law,
,
mutual concept,
mutual concept relativism,
concept relativism,
Rosencrantz Guildenstern,
arrows outrageous fortune,
play hamlet,
“good bad”,
action action,
idea relativism,
depends people,
arrows outrageous,
outrageous fortune,
wrong bad,
|
Acceptance Essays
