William Shakespeare's Hamlet has always provided literary critics with a rich source for character analysis. This source has grown as critics no longer evaluate Hamlet as an artistic representation limited to the depth of which the author characterizes him but rather evaluate him as a living human being (Lowers 10). As the scrutiny on Hamlet the human being has intensified, many people have been called to wonder if Hamlet is insane.
             Before trying to answer this question, it should be considered that this is possibly the wrong question. "Insane" is a legal term, not a medical one. People often mistakenly assume that the word "insane" is interchangeable with the medical term "psychosis", which describes mental sickness. The majority of the U.S. states determine insanity by the McNaghten rule. By this standard, an insanity defense can be established by proving that the defendant did not know what he was doing or did not realize that it was wrong (Davison 592). It is obvious from Hamlet's comments throughout the play that he is aware of what his actions are and what the consequences will be. Hamlet's presence of mind allows him to stay one step ahead of Claudius. He reveals that he has sensed Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's ulterior motives when he asks them to "play upon this pipe" (Ham. 3.2.358-59). Hamlet continuously leaves Polonius confused, as he is too slow to fully understand Hamlet's veiled insults. Even when Hamlet does contradict himself or acts oddly, it is impossible to rule out that he was putting on an "antic disposition" (Ham. 172). Hamlet himself suggests this is the case when he tells Guildenstern that he is "but mad north-northwest" (Ham. 2.2.348). Many scholars accept these comments as proof of Hamlet's sanity. McGrail refers to Hamlet "feigning madness" (Remnick 74). After examining Hamlet's words and actions, it is reasonable to assume that Hamlet is not only sane, but also most likely sharper than a...