Moral Philosophy and Character Development in Hamlet

Hamlet by William Shakespeare is an ideal resource for evaluating moral philosophy and character construction. Throughout the play, Hamlet, Denmark’s prince, struggles with profound questions about the nature of good and evil, duty, and the consequences of action and inaction. The play provides valuable insights into human morality through ethical predicaments that transcend time. Shakespeare, through the play, explores the complexities of moral philosophy through the protagonist’s internal struggle with justice, revenge, and ethical thinking and ultimately shows how moral quandaries affect people’s actions and lead toward inevitable tragedy. 

Hamlet faces a moral conflict because the ghost of his father (the former king) tells him that Claudius murdered him and now demands justice through revenge. He faces moral distress since he needs to fulfill his father’s orders that go against his ethical beliefs. Hamlet considers the moral implications of his revenge from the Christian perspective, which requires rulers to conduct themselves ethically according to divine laws. During Act 3, scene 1 of the play, Hamlet expresses his internal battle through the line “To be or not to be”, indicating his concerns about the moral nature of life, suffering, and the effects of an individual’s choices (The Tragedy of Hamlet). Also, he postpones his mission of vengeance despite his father’s request for justice, unlike Laertes, who expedites his revenge plot. The deep moral and intellectual intricacy of Hamlet’s delayed behavior reveals the ethical character he develops through his contemplation of the justice in revenge and the compatibility of murder with his core principles. 

The play also underscores Hamlet’s moral development through his interactions with other characters. First, despite loving her, he is often callous and condescending towards Ophelia due to his indignation with Gertrude’s betrayal and Claudius’s moral decay. These interactions reflect his internal conflict and growing disillusionment with human nature. The phenomenon is evident in the play (Act 1, scene 2) when he states, “Frailty, thy name is woman,” which underscores his cynical attitude towards the morality, agency, and virtue of women (Nangare, 35). However, as the play continues, Hamlet’s moral reasoning shifts, evidenced by his philosophical discussion with Horatio which indicates his growing understanding of fate, providence, and the limits of the agency of humankind. The play signifies a drastic shift in moral outlook through Hamlet since, unlike with his earlier rash actions such as killing Polonius, he recognizes fate’s impact and that some events are predestined. 

Furthermore, moral philosophy is evident through the theme of deception and truth. The Danish monarch’s court is saturated with political intrigue, where deception is employed as a pathway to power. Similarly, Hamlet employs deception when simulating madness to expose Claudius’s guilt. Although the approach is successful in revealing Claudius as the king’s killer, it raises concerns about ethical manipulation and justification for deceit. “The Mousetrap,” the play-within-the-play, is a miniature exploration of this question because Hamlet employs trickery to expose the truth. However, his elaborate schemes highlight the implications of morally compromised actions, as they contribute to the deaths of many characters. Nonetheless, despite the fact that unethical actions have dire implications and outcomes, Shakespeare denotes that ensuring moral integrity in a corrupt world is a challenge. 

Another central element of Hamlet’s character development is his exploration of death and the afterlife. His encounter with the gravedigger and the discovery of Yorick’s skull causes him to think about the universality of death and its impact on equality, leading to a shift in his moral philosophy. The transition enhances his belief in fate as a guide for events, dispelling his worries about his actions’ implications. The line, “There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow,” contrasts his previous existential despair to indicate an acceptance of the divine will (The Tragedy of Hamlet). In this line, he shows that even small and insignificant events, such as the fall of a sparrow, are heavily influenced by a divine plan, indicating his moral development. 

Lastly, moral transformation occurs in Hamlet’s duel against Laertes, as he no longer hesitates or doubts his actions. At this point, he recognizes the possible adverse implications of revenge but no longer overanalyzes his actions. In Act 5, scene 2, before their passing, Hamlet and Laertes exchange forgiveness with each other—the moral reconciliation between them marks their conscious discovery of the futility of their attempts to seek retribution. The tragic elements in the play demonstrate how unresolved ethical and moral dilemmas have detrimental implications for people, including death. The moral corruption responsible for nearly all of the significant character deaths throughout the story emphasizes the inevitable breakdown of society when ethical values decline.

Hamlet provides thoughtful perspectives on character development and moral philosophy through its analysis of the ethical dilemmas that are typical of human nature. The protagonist progresses toward righteousness while dealing with philosophical themes of honesty, justice, and death. The play demonstrates that seeking moral rectitude remains admirable even though human nature and societal breakdown make it a virtually impossible goal. Finally, Hamlet serves as a powerful instrument for identifying various obstacles related to ethical thought because it connects with audiences across multiple generations. 

Works Cited

Nangare, D. R. “Revisiting Shakespeare’s “Frailty, thy name is Woman”: Unraveling Misogyny Allegations through Contextual Analysis.” International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, vol. 12, no. 1, 2023, pp. 035-039.

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. shakespeare.mit.edu/hamlet/full.html.