Hamlet and the Limits of Knowledge - Research Paper Example

Different critics hold different opinions regarding the place of knowledge and its limits in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Some treat knowledge as a serious on Hamlet’s shoulders, whereas others suggest that in Hamlet, knowledge is essentially about understanding the meaning of life which, as it appears, is virtually unachievable. However, it seems that despite his philosophic endeavors, Hamlet nonetheless fails to come out of his moral and cognitive darkness, and it is the realization of his own ignorance that sets the limits on human knowledge and indicates the ultimate point of Hamlets’ self-actualization.

Different critics hold different opinions about the limits of knowledge in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Robert B. Bennett treats knowledge as a serious burden on Hamlet’s shoulders. Therefore, Hamlet’s life and actions throughout the play are entirely about trying to balance the burden of his knowledge with the need to act (Bennett 92). Bennett is confident that Hamlet’s knowledge is integrally linked to his sense of self, and it prevents Hamlet from falling down to become merely a man of action (92).

Whether or not knowledge have limits is not clear, but it is clear that knowledge in itself can become a serious limitation to human actions (Bennett 90). Hamlet is envious about the scope of actions enjoyed by thoughtless Fortinbras, and he calls knowledge “some craven scruple” (Bennett 90). Bennett’s opinion about knowledge and its place in Hamlet is somewhat confusing. Other critics have been more explicit in their discussion of knowledge and its limits in Shakespeare’s play. Levy writes that Hamlet’s failure to control his reason, his betrayal of the conscious self, his negative moral judgment at the end of the play, and his awareness of ignorance altogether constitute the ultimate limit of knowledge (208).

Levy claims that knowledge is always shocking, and ignorance can be a relevant defense against such shocks (204). Yet, in no way is Hamlet ignorant; on the contrary, he successfully progresses from the thought of killing Claudius to awareness of his own mortality (Levy 209). This is where, according to Levy, he eventually achieves epistemological self-control, where Hamlet’s awareness of the limits of knowledge also constitutes the ultimate point of knowledge ever achievable by humans (209).

This line of mortality vs. knowledge is also supported by Norford, who writes that the limits of Hamlet’s knowledge are in his acceptance of life and death (575). Moreover, only by the end of the story does Hamlet finally realize that everything is subjective in this world (Norford 575). Human language can never explain the complexity of human experiences (Norford 575). It is when Hamlet recognizes that “the rest is silence” that he approaches the final point of self-development through learning (Norford 575).

Modern Shakespeare critics are extremely interested in the study of knowledge and its conceptual implications for the development of the plot in Hamlet. At the epistemological level, Hamlet seems to exemplify the culmination of human knowledge and the final point of one’s search of self. From the first passage of the tragedy and until its end, Hamlet gradually develops a new understanding of the reality, in which he lives. Levy writes that ignorance turns into the most serious moral hazard for Hamlet (209).

However, objectively, and despite his self-conscious endeavors, in his knowledge of