The Conscious And Unconscious Mind

The study of consciousness in modern day psychology is becoming increasingly difficult to explain. In the early days of consciousness studies it may have been explained as our experience or awareness (Blackmore, 2010). However, over a number of years, there have been many psychologists who have contributed many important theories towards the explanation of how consciousness works, and its initial existence. As Chalmers states: “There is nothing that we know more intimately than conscious experience, but there is nothing harder to explain” (Chalmers, 1995 p.200). Being one of the leading philosophers in consciousness, David Chalmers introduced the idea of the Hard Problem in 1994. Chalmers defined the hard problem as: “The questions of how physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experience” (Chalmers, 1995 p.63). Chalmers suggested that he found it difficult to understand how a small mass of grey matter such as the brain could produce conscious experience. These ideas of a ‘hard problem’ in consciousness were rejected by a number of theorists, which will be discussed later in the essay. Another idea which Chalmers has put forward is the zombie. A zombie, according to Chalmers is a being identical to you and I, speaks like you, acts like you, but is not conscious (Blackmore, 2010). A zombie contains no qualia (a physical conscious experience). The idea of the zombie put forward by Chalmers is extremely important in the explanation of consciousness and has been

The English Play writer, William Shakespeare had written many well-known pieces of work including Hamlet. Hamlet is known to be one of his most popular works. Hamlet was written in the late 16th Century about the Prince of Denmark. The original title of the work was The Tragedy of Hamlet, now it is referred to as just Hamlet. In Hamlet, William Shakespeare uses the mental state of his characters to prove that not all characters in books have to be one dimensional. Shakespeare’s writing shows that humans are complex, and can have different mental states. Characters throughout the story such as, Hamlet, Gertrude, and Ophelia show their not so stable mental state. First we will analyze Hamlet and talk about Ernest Jones’ Psycho-analytic study of Hamlet. Then we will talk about Ophelia and how the events that happened leading up to her death or suicide played a role into her mental state. Finally we will analyze Gertrude, the Queen’s role in Hamlet, and how she is a mentally weak woman and relies on the men in her life.

In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the titular hero and tragic figure of the play constantly finds himself unable to act on the Ghost’s instructions to take revenge on King Claudius despite the compelling reasons he realizes for doing so. The reason for this delay is Hamlet’s tragic flaw – his tendency towards thought and introspection rather than impulse and action. Because of this flaw, Hamlet is unable to ignore the moral aspects of his actions and “thereby becomes the creature of mere meditation, and [he] loses his natural power of action” (Coleridge, 343).

Rothman expresses that “Freud thought that prudery and denial had for centuries prevented critics from acknowledging the play’s propulsive undercurrent, which, he believed, the new psychoanalytic vocabulary made it possible to acknowledge. “The conflict in ‘Hamlet’ is so effectively concealed,” he wrote, “that it was left to me to unearth it” (Rothman 5). However, it is important to note that although this literary analysis and theology is a valid breakthrough in how one views and acknowledges Hamlet, it is by no means an all-explanatory guide to the soul existence that is Hamlet. Rothman mistakes the Oedipus Complex (Freud theology regarding Hamlet) as the root of the play, arguing “the Oedipus complex provides the definitive interpretation of ‘Hamlet”. It is naive and arrogant to assume one definitive analysis technique (in this case psychoanalysis) as the majority of the play; in reality, it is the infinite number of analyzations spoken about by an infinite number of critics that make up the true meaning of Hamlet. In simpler terms, the true meaning is the decades of diversely collective thoughts, analysis, and ideas presented as the play’s

Shakespeare’s Hamlet shows strange occurrences in Hamlet’s mind and the possibility of an intangible entity persuading him towards constant confusion. His many decisions give question to his sanity, as if irrational and unreal voices attempt to provoke him into committing strange actions. His continuous struggle to make concrete decisions throughout the play drowns him in episodes of uncertainty, rage, and sadness. Even when Hamlet makes a decision, there is always an underlying worry of whether or not the soundness of his judgement is rational or if his decision is beyond question his most sincere and desireable choice. His conflict between knowing how to feel and when to act is a reflection of the theme known as “being and acting.” Hamlet’s challenge of not knowing whether something should be done and his conflicting feelings of not knowing how to act or when to act on a situation shows the recurring “being and acting” theme throughout the play.

With Hamlet’s tragic flaw being his inability to act, he is plagued throughout the play by his immense intelligence and philosophical nature, which causes him to overanalyze each situation, rendering him unable to carry out any action in response. This is evident in the play by the frequent delay of acting out his father’s revenge due to the uncertainty of the evidence pertaining to his uncle’s crime. Hamlet’s inability to act creates a discourse between hamlet and his consciousness, generating an abundance of stress, which causes him to become increasingly frustrated as the play progresses. This frustration leads to him at moments in the play to behave in a rash and impulsive way or acting in an inappropriate manner, contradicting his methodical and reserved disposition. It is the consequences of these “inappropriate” actions that resurfaces at the plays end, to haunt the character, as Hamlet’s inability to act while using his renowned logic and intelligence ultimately leads to his eventual demise at the plays conclusion, due to his inability to act both “effectively” and “appropriately” in critical situations.

Hamlet is one of Shakespeare’s most famous plays. In it, a young, Danish prince struggles with the death of his father and the betrayal of his mother. This struggle is so profound; it shakes its main character Hamlet to the core and brings him to the brink of sanity. Shakespeare uses madness to convey important information throughout the play especially through Hamlet and his love interest, Ophelia. Hamlet does not always appear to be mad, in fact throughout the play his sanity is questioned by the reader and other characters. Whether real or faked, Hamlet and Ophelia’s madness reveal to us more about their characters, opinions and secrets than their regular discourse.

With the coming of Freudian theory in the first half of this century and the subsequent emergence of psychoanalytically-oriented literary criticism in the 1960s, the question of Hamlet's underlying sanity has become a major issue in the interpretation of Hamlet. While related concern with the Prince's inability to take action had already directed scholarly attention toward the uncertainty of Hamlet's mental state, modern psychological views of the play have challenged his sanity at a deeper, sub-conscious level, typically citing self-destructive and, most pointedly, sexual drives to explain his behavior, his words, and the mental processes beneath them. In a play with undertones of incest and heavy doses of

Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, begins with the appearance of a ghost, an apparition, possibly a hallucination. Thus, from the beginning, Shakespeare presents the air of uncertainty, of the unnatural, which drives the action of the play and develops in the protagonist as a struggle to clarify what only seems to be absolute and what is actually reality. Hamlet's mind, therefore, becomes the central force of the play, choosing the direction of the conflict by his decisions regarding his revenge and defining the outcome.

Shakespeare masters the idea that consciousness is the pinnacle of the human experience. Without the ability to reflect upon oneself, there is no room for optimum growth and self-reflection. In Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet, Shakespeare develops Hamlet’s metacognition through three substantial soliloquies by solidifying the idea that both conscious decision making and reflection work synonymously in determining self-actualization as well as foiling Hamlet with individual characters throughout the play.

In doing so, one will come to the conclusion that Hamlet is driven by forces other than what is obvious to the reader, as well as Hamlet himself. Given this example, one must denounce the assumption that Hamlet is aware of the forces that motivate him, and understand that Hamlet’s true motivation is unconscious This unconscious force is the true reason behind Hamlet’s mysterious behavior. In naming this force, one must look beneath the surface of Hamlet’s own level of consciousness, and into what Hamlet himself is consciously unaware. The key to understanding Hamlet lies in the realization of the unconscious energy that provokes him to action and inaction. By channeling into Hamlet’s unconscious, providing Freudian psychoanalytical perspectives, Hamlet’s true unconscious motivation will be uncovered, and the mystery of Hamlet will be silenced.

Similarly, this article discusses the theme of the complexity of action. This play depicts of how at times the decision to act is usually influenced not only by coherent considerations, like the need for inevitability but also by psychological, ethical as well as emotional factors. For instance, Hamlet is depicted to distrusting the impression that it is even likely to behave in a measured, focused manner. Like when he acts he prefers to do it in a blind manner, recklessly as well as violently.

which take place in the play do not always provide Hamlet with a possible clear

If one wants to truly understand the psychological implications of William Shakespeare's Hamlet, the primary focus should be on the character Hamlet, and how he develops and modifies throughout the play. Using the fundamentals of the psychoanalytic perspective of critical evaluation, one would be able to truly identify and explore the true nature of Hamlet, and the effects that his character has on the situation surrounding him. In order to gain a true understanding of most of the detail that is implied through Hamlet's way of portraying himself to others, it is vital to look deep into the actions that are carried out, and analyze them psychoanalytically.

Instincts are something that every human being has. They affect everything that we do in our day to day lives. Whether we realize it consciously or not. There are many forms of mental and emotional treatment, but psychoanalysis is different. It requires a certain mindset because of the ethical dilemmas that arise during sessions. There is no room for judgment; any judgment of anti-social or destructive thoughts are detrimental to the psychoanalysis process because the patient would shut down. There is a lot of criticism about psychoanalysis because many people believe that what is in the sub-conscious should remain there (Meadow, 2011).