Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Moral decision making
“What does God want? Does God want goodness or the choice of goodness? Is a man who chooses the bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?” (Burgess, A Clockwork Orange, part two, chapter 3)
Are our decisions subject to the inclinations of our past actions, as behaviorist would proclaim? Or do we have governance over our actions, or in other words, free will, as Humanists would argue? Furthermore, what is “right?” Is it to succumb to the societal and religious expectations of “good?” Or is it to act on one’s own intent? These are the questions that Alex from Stanley Kubrick’s Film adaptation of Burgess’ “A Clockwork Orange” and Hamlet from Shakespeare’s celebrated tragedy both struggle in answering as they
…show more content…
Meanwhile, Alex struggles between his tendencies to commit “a bit of the old ultra-violence” and to surrender to the expectation of a good citizen that is forced upon him. Both stories challenge the idea of whether accepting to commit good whilst going against one’s own interests would truly produce “good.” For our culture has placed such bias ideals of what is truly good and bad that we have forgotten that humans are complex beings, different from gears and parts in a clockwork orange; the complexity of our actions and thoughts are what differ us from beasts and machines. The oft-dismissed truth that our behaviors will inevitably deviate from the paragons of good and evil is what truly defines us, and Hamlet and Alex alike, as humans. Taking the Humanist stance on the question of free will, what would be good if there is nothing relative such as evil to compare it to? Would a homogenous community where the Ten Commandments are followed to the tee be truly good when there is no choice to be evil? In such a controlled environment, will Hamlet truly ask the question of “to be or not to be” or will he be quixotic and accept the façade of choice as truth? And even if he does choose to deceive himself, is there truly a fault in wanting to free oneself from one’s
“The truth is that nothing can give us what we think we want, and ordinarily think we have. We cannot be morally responsible, in the absolute, buck-stopping way in which we often unreflectively think we are. We cannot have "strong" free will of the kind that we would need to have, in order to be morally responsible in this way” (…).
It also follows that God, not as benevolent as could be hoped, prefers the maximization of good (2) as opposed to the minimization of evil (1). This is disquieting for the individual who might be the victim of suffering a “greater good.”
Shakespeare portrays the protagonist, Hamlet, as someone with a great emotional and physical capacity for self-sacrifice. Burdened with a heroic task of avenging his father’s murder, Hamlet chooses to put on an “antic disposition”. This leads him to willingly transform his identity by altering his values, beliefs and his self-image. Hamlet also chooses to sacrifices true love for Ophelia, his right to freely express himself, and ultimately his life as well. Shakespeare shows how an individual, when burdened by a difficult task, will sacrifice anything including his own life for the purpose of fulfilling that goal.
Many people have different views on the moral subject of good and evil or human nature. It is the contention of this paper that humans are born neutral, and if we are raised to be good, we will mature into good human beings. Once the element of evil is introduced into our minds, through socialization and the media, we then have the potential to do bad things. As a person grows up, they are ideally taught to be good and to do good things, but it is possible that the concept of evil can be presented to us. When this happens, we subconsciously choose whether or not to accept this evil. This where the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke become interesting as both men differed in the way they believed human nature to be. Hobbes and Locke both picture a different scene when they express human nature.
Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a terrific model of what takes place when people prefer to fulfill others requests and plans for their spirits. The major players in Hamlet choose to follow what others request of them, and this leads to their detriment. Since they do not stay true to themselves, they are responsible for their own brutal deaths. From Ophelia to Hamlet, every character became a slave to someone else’s desires and wishes. This ensures they lose all control over their future and places them on the direct path to self-destruction.
Hamlet the Play and the Movie Hamlet by William Shakespeare is a story about a king that was murdered by his brother and the prince has been asked by his father?s ghost to avenge his murder. The original story line has been altered a few times since it has been written. The original Hamlet the play and the altered Hamlet the movie are shown differently in many different ways. Hamlet the movie with Mel Gibson shows different things than the play, but there are three major differences between the two. The three major differences are in the way both of the productions start out, differences in the scene that the players put on a play, and differences in the way the productions end.
William Shakespeare was a Stratford Grammar School boy, who was a member of the Church of England, similar to just about everyone else in Stratford. However, due to some events that occurred in the Shakespeare family home, there is some evidence that could prove that the family may have had some Roman Catholic connections. When William Shakespeare was 10 years old, legal issues and debt took a toll on his family’s life. Shakespeare’s father’s stopped attending alderman meetings which resulted in the removal of his name to become an alderman, and he was also forced to sell his beautiful home. The cause of this crisis is unknown, however the records can be used to throw together the idea that there were peculiar religious events going on (Fox). Due to these mishaps, William Shakespeare’s religion is a bit of a mystery. The play, Hamlet, was written by William Shakespeare during the Elizabethan era, which happened to be a time when religious conflicts were a big deal (Alsaif). The protagonist in the story, Hamlet, is a character who seems to make his choices through his religious beliefs. Hamlet is a very indecisive person, but his thoughts on religion tend to persuade him. In the play Hamlet, William Shakespeare uses the character of Hamlet to show the flaws in all religions. Hamlet does his best to follow the rules of Christianity, but he often questions the morality involved. Although Shakespeare belonged to the Church of England, he didn’t find any particular religion to be perfect.
An indigenous belief at the time, the Great Chain of Being shapes Hamlet’s worldview and controls his actions. Given that “he himself is a subject to his birth” Hamlet is not his own master and “may not, as unvalued persons do, / Carve for himself” without regard to his social responsibilities (1.3.21-23). From this background emerges Hamlet’s initial stance on the sentiment of passion. Even before his desire to avenge Old Hamlet overtakes his reason, Hamlet wishes to find “that man / That is not passion’s slave,” who he “will wear…In my heart’s core, ay, in my heart of hearts” thus making his fledgling argument that passion is to be avoided and one must follow the Great Chain of Being (3.2.67-69). Hamlet believes strongly in the emphasis of the Great Chain on reason which makes him wonder “What is a man / if his chief good and market of his time / be but to sleep and feed?” (4.4.35-37). Without using one’s intelligence and thoughtfulness one risks becoming “A beast,” Hamlet argues that God would not have made humans with “That capability and godlike reason / To fust in [them] unused” (4.4.38-41). Therefore Hamlet must adhere to the Great Chain of Being and rise above life’s temptation to give in to passion and
Shakespeare’s Hamlet revolves around the title character’s undeniable obligation to immediately avenge his father’s death by killing Claudius. Yet much time elapses before Hamlet finally does slay his evil uncle, leading to a fundamental question: what causes the hero to delay before eventually managing to salvage some retribution? The answer is that Hamlet’s reoccuring state of impractical contemplation renders him incapable of any decisive action that could have brought quick revenge.
The loss of a parent can have a traumatic effect on one. It can lead he or she to a place of sadness, darkness and depression. In Shakespeare's revenge tragedy "Hamlet", the passing of the King stirs up the same emotions in the prince Hamlet. Although, it would be the starting point of his journey filled with deceptions, murders and conspiracy. After a visit from his dead father as a ghost, and the revelation of his uncle's betrayal, Hamlet embarks on a path to avenge the death of his father (Shakespeare). In the midst of all the lies and deceptions, before his ultimate downfall Hamlet achieves his goal of avenging the death of his father by killing Claudius, while liberating Denmark from a deceitful ruler; his uncle Claudius.
In William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, Hamlet does avenge his father’s death but at the cost of many life’s. Multiple characters must be analyzed in order to make an opinion about Hamlet’s revenge. There are many reasons to hamlet delaying avenging his father’s death because he finds out from a ghost he could not trust. Hamlet can be compared to Laertes and Fortinbra. They are very similar but different and the same time. Each of them loved their fathers very much and felt as if they have to avenge their father’s death. Something they had in common has been that they felt their fathers were disrespected not only their fathers but them as well. Hamlet took a very weak approach to his father revenge where as in Laertes was quick to act and Fortinbra was in the middle.
Many perceive The Lion King, Disney's most successful movie to date, as Disney's only original movie; the only movie not previously a fairy tale from one country or another. This, however, is not the case. While The Lion King seems not to be beased on a fairy tale, it is in fact strongly based on the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare. Disney writers cleverly conceal the basic character archetypes and simplified storyline in a children's tale of cute lions in Africa. To the seasoned reader, however, Hamlet comes screaming out of the screenplay as obviously as Hamlet performed onstage.
How does the use of comic relief best contrast the tragedy of Hamlet? In great works of literature a comic relief is used as contrast to a serious scene to intensify the overall tragic nature of the play or to relieve tension. As illustrated in Shakespeare’s tragedy Hamlet, intense scenes are joined with character’s banter and vacuous actions as to add a comic relief. In Hamlet, Polonius acts as a comic relief by his dull and windy personality, Hamlet uses his intelligence and his negativity toward the king and queen to create humor, while on the other hand Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are a comic relief by their senseless actions and naïve natures. Polonius, Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are all used as a comic relief to increase the ultimate tragic nature of the play.
Decisions, we make them every day. For example, we select what to consume and what clothes to put on but some judgments are more important than what you eat and what you wear. A decision can mean life or death. We try to make correct choices, but what makes a decision right? We are influenced by people, books, and stories. As Elie Wiesel once said, “Let us not forget, after all, that there is always a moment when the moral choice is made. Often because of one story or one book or one person, we are able to make a different choice, a choice for humanity, for life.”
From this play we learn of the difficulty associated with taking a life as Hamlet agonises as to how and when he should kill Claudius and furthermore whether he should take his own life. Hamlet being a logical thinker undergoes major moral dilemma as he struggles to make accurate choices. From the internal conflict that the playwright expresses to us it is evident that it can kill someone, firstly mentally then physically. The idea of tragedy is explored in great detail through conflict where the playwright’s main message is brought across to the audience; Shakespeare stresses to his audience the point that conflict be it internal or external it can bring upon the downfall of great people and in turn have them suffer a tragic fate. It is Shakespeare’s aim to show us the complexity of man and that moral decisions are not easily made.