Little is known about Shakespeare’s personal life or his own beliefs. Most of what we know is derived from his expansive catalog of plays; the consensus is that the character of Hamlet is most similar to the Bard himself. “In recent years, studies of Shakespeare’s plays have concerned themselves with everyday objects and ‘matter’ rather than with questions of philosophy or moral value” (Parvini). To combat that tendency towards the everyday, it will be useful to examine the moral philosophy of Hamlet within his titular play, thus exposing Shakespeare’s own potential ethics.
There are, arguably, seven main schools of thought surrounding morals and ethics. Those are as follows: objectivism, relativism, egoism, altruism, virtue ethics, duty ethics, and utilitarianism (Fieser). (Some of these moral theories can overlap and interplay.) Objectivism suggests that moral values are “beyond subjective human conventions” (Fieser). Objectivism further suggests that moral values are absolute and never-changing and that they apply to all rational creatures (Fieser). Basically, an objectivist believes every person is born with inherent, similar moral values.
Relativists argue that moral values are strictly human inventions (Fieser). There are two basic relativist theories: individual relativism and cultural relativism. Individual relativism states that everyone makes their own moral law/code and that each individual is right because their codes are tailored and separate. Cultural relativism states that society creates the standard moral law/code and that each society is right because, again, their codes are specific to them.
Egoism can be scrutinized in two parts as well: psychological egoism and ethical egoism. Psychological egoism “maintains that self-oriented interests ultimately motivate all human actions” (Fieser). Ethical egoism builds on that idea; an ethical egoist believes an action is “morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable only to the agent performing the action” (Fieser). Altruism is practically the opposite thought process, as it is a moral philosophy of selflessness. One judges one’s actions based on how they hurt or help others rather than how they hurt or help oneself.
“Virtue ethics… places less emphasis on learning rules, and instead stresses the importance of developing good habits of character, such as benevolence… Once I’ve acquired benevolence, for example, I will then habitually act in a benevolent manner” (Fieser) Duty ethics reflects more upon the before-mentioned objectivist viewpoints. “Duty theories base morality on specific, foundational principles of obligation. These theories are sometimes called deontological, from the Greek word deon, or duty, in view of the foundational nature of our duty or obligation. They are also sometimes called nonconsequentialist since these principles are obligatory, irrespective of the consequences that might follow from our actions. For example, it is wrong to not care for our children even if it results in some great benefit, such as financial savings” (Fieser).
Finally, utilitarianism is all about what actions benefit the greatest number of people overall (including oneself). Sometimes, callous decisions can still be considered morally upright under the view of utilitarianism since it is a numbers game. For instance, if one has to kill someone in order to save, say, three others, then that murder is morally sound.
Hamlet’s actions fall under more than one moral philosophy as per the aforementioned definitions. In fact, he seems to be battling between being an objectivist with a twisted sense of duty ethics and being a relativist in the cultural category. As previously explained, objectivists believe morality is just that—objective. Morality is a code that everyone has within them that cannot be altered by human conceit. The fact that Hamlet is offended by the immorality of others (namely King Claudius and Hamlet’s own mother) suggests that he believes they, like everyone else, have a moral code within them to which they should adhere. The first example of Hamlet’s objectivist morality comes in his first soliloquy—“…within a month:/ Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears/Had left the flushing in her galled eyes,/She married. O, most wicked speed, to post/With such dexterity to incestuous sheets!/It is not nor it cannot come to good” (Shakespeare). Hamlet is holding his mother to the objective moral standard of “do not cheat” that he expects to find in everybody; more importantly, he expects everyone to live up to that standard. His comments about her actions therefore serve to cast her as an immoral character, especially since her cheating is also described as “incestuous”.
Subscribe to continue reading
Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.
