The Lack of Absolute Truth in Hamlet by William Shakespeare

It is in human nature to presume reality, as directly proportional to what individuals experience through their senses and things are visible to the naked eye It is human inclination for people to perceive reality in ways that caters to their ideals or interests even though it may appear out of their imagination, and imagination is in no way any form of reality. In Hamlet, readers are led to question their actual existence and their certainty for Hamlet distinguishes the fact that in a world filled with deception and inconsistencies, absolute truth really does not exist. Hamlet is separated from other plays because in Hamlet, the readers are given what they must presume as concrete facts without any evidence that those particular facts are proven. The reader must read into the souls and minds of the characters in order to determine the validity of the details they are given. Many readers may look right past the very ambiguous and open to argument elements of this play, but its unclear and indefinable nature is where the true beauty of Hamlet lies.

ln Hamlet, the readers learn that there is an unattainable knowledge of absolute certainty; it does not exist. We are provided with two distinct examples to exemplify the implausibility of concrete truth. The ghost represents a figure that awakens Hamlet’s inner feelings of anger and madness, and it is highly argued whether or not the ghost is just merely a mirage appearing to play with Hamlet’s soul or if he is there to fight for legitimate justice. Claudius also exemplifies the concept of the impossibility of certainty because if you think about it, all the readers are left with to determine the truth about the death of Hamlet’s father is Claudius‘ word and the ghost‘s accusation, neither of which are absolute.

Academic anxiety?
Get original paper in 3 hours and nail the task
Get your paper price

124 experts online

The ghost could appear to the readers of Hamlet as the messenger of all chaos that erupts in the kingdom of Denmark Prior to the ghost’s arrival, Hamlet stricken with grief and harsh feelings of his mother’s marriage but it is not until he has his encounter with the ghost that he flips from being an unnoticed but angry prince to a fully disclosed insane man, In Hamlet’s first encounter with the ghost he is clearly not in a neutral state of mind so he does not react to the ghost’s appearance with rationality, for a rational human being‘s first instinct after seeing the ghost would be to panic, be frightened, and without a doubt never acknowledge its appearance, but Hamlet embraces the ghost with an open mind, From a rational point of view, one could question its actual existence because a rational person does not believe in ghost because they defy the law of human nature Can the reader believe in the existence of this ghost?

Is the ghost what it actually appears to be or is it just there to misguide Hamlet‘s emotions? Could Hamlet just be seeing what he wants to see in order to justify his revenge? In Hamlet, the readers are too quick to judge the validity for Hamlet and his revenge; they are even too quick to judge the goodness in Hamlet’s soul. Hamlet uses something he cannot be completely sure of to justify his crazy schemes, and the reader knows that, How can the readers depict Hamlet as the victim and Claudius as the villain when the nature of Hamlet’s revenge is absolutely uncertain? The readers are inclined to view Claudius as the victim from the beginning of the play, He marries his dead brother‘s wife and takes over his kingdom, he is the epitome of all villains in a story; selfish and immoral.

The readers are even more angered towards Claudius when Hamlet, who is portrayed as the victim, starts to plot his revenge against his uncle. The readers presume that Hamlet’s revenge is justified because the ghost informs them so but how can the readerjustify Hamlet’s motive when a crime with no witnesses can never be proved? Can Hamlet and the readers view into Claudius mind and soul to determine absolute certainty about the nature of his Hamlet’s father’s death? If the readers or Hamlet cannot absolutely certify the nature of the situation they are in, then doesn’t the possibility of Hamlet as the villain and Claudius as the victim remain?

Hamlet is simply a play based upon indecisiveness and impulsive assumptions, which could lead the readers to believe in Hamlet‘s goodness and Claudius’s evil even though there remains a possibility of the opposite. Hamlet is most interesting because it really make the readers think about all the impracticalities and uncertainty our lives are built upon If you think about it, it is normal for human nature to judge impulsively and take people actions and undisclosed qualities and actions for granted. We are quick too judge about the nature of individual actions when all we merely have to make our judgments about them is circumstantial evidence.

This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly. Don’t submit it as your own as it will be considered plagiarism.

Need a custom essay sample written specially to meet your requirements?

Choose skilled expert on your subject and get original paper with free plagiarism report

Order custom paper Without paying upfront

The Lack of Absolute Truth in Hamlet by William Shakespeare. (2023, May 11). Retrieved from