Reason or excuse

[sang]

So this is basically diverting from Cesar's discussion question. He mentions that Hamlet had a basic 'reason' to carry out his muder.
My answer to his question was that he didn't have a reason but that he had an excuse.
Anyways, what do you guys think? Did Hamlet have a legitamate reason to kill Caludius or was it just an excuse for him?

I personally said that it was an excuse because I think that murder isn't a case where "revenge"or anything along those lines isn't applicable. Murder isn't just a matter of getting somebody back as a temporary thing, but it's causing a permanent loss of a life, regardless if the victim's innocent or not. This is an extreme example but if I were to hit somebody, then most likely the other person would try to hit me back, and essentially, this is the idea of revenge. In Hamlet's case, it's more complicated, but it obviously has the element of revenge, and in my opinion, applying revenge or vengence to murder shouldn't be considered at all.

[delmanykkfs]

I think Hamlet didn't use his revenge as excuse I mean he wasn't really proud of his family he was witness to see his mother marry his uncle after his father deid and he decided to take revenge for it, the story shows that he really wanted to kill his uncle but I don't he did for a excuse

[sujeonggg]

I also think it was an excuse. And because Hamlet doesn't even have a specific evidence that Claudius killed his father. I think it's possible what the ghost is saying to him could be something that Hamlet wants to believe. At that point, Hamlet's disgust toward his mom and uncle goes on peak due to their "incestuous" marriage, so Hamlet might wants to have an excuse to kill his uncle.

[jessicak016]

I think that Hamlet used an "excuse" so that he can justify himself why he would kill Claudius. Hamlet really seeks for revenge, since nobody would punish Claudius for killing his father. So Hamlet thought that he should be the one, who should punish Claudius for the murder.

[sageda]

I don't think there's ever a legitimate reason for murder unless it's for self defense. But we have to remember that he was probably insane. I mean, isn't that kind of a pass for murder? If he weren't insane, then no.

[anica]

I agree with Sageda. In any case, I just believe that murder is wrong, even if you want to avenge on behalf of your father's death.

[michellelee]

I don't think Hamlet had a legitimate reason to kill Claudius but it was just an excuse for him to make himself feel little less guilty. He was very depressed and going crazy when he found out that his mother had married his uncle soon after his father's death. Remember when he wished that his flesh would melt? He was probably not normal by the time the ghost appeared and told Hamlet the story that he didn't even know whether it was true or not. So I think his reason for the murder was just an excuse.

[ginayang]

I think Hamlet did not have a legitamate reason to kill Claudius. It was just an excuse for him to get rid of the person he despised. Hamlet had no real evidence that Claudius killed his father. A "ghost" told him that Claudius murdered his father but Hamlet could have been delusional. I believe that Hamlet was just angry at Claudius for replacing his father's place so quickly after his death. Thus, he wanted to put all of the blame on Claudius.

[joon]

With my beliefs, revenge is never an excuse to kill anyone. I think that Hamlet was using this as an excuse to give himself something to live for, and to protect his suffering self by hiding his pain with anger. Or it might be an excuse for him to destroy himself without going against his religion. He probably knew that killing the king would force him to make some big sacrifices, but he did it anyways.

[franicaza95]

There will never be a reason to murder somebody speciially if it is to avenge someone. I think he felt like the only way to make hinself feel better after his fathers death was at least do that for hin, which is kill the person who killed him. This goes back to something else i thought which was the reason of why hamlets father came back as a ghost. Is that an good enough exucse for hamlet to bring up for killing someone...NO.

[edward08]

it is not quite proper but i think mostly as a revenge, after hearing all the story of what happen to his father by the ghost i would feel extremely angry, i would of course have the mink set to try to kill cladiaus

[seongrae]

I also think hamlet’s revenge is an excuse. Hamlet actually did not have any evidence except from the story by the ghost. As a class, we have been talked about the theme of uncertainty for several times. It is not sure that the there is a real ghost or a ghost who is Hamlet’s father. I also do not consider murder as revenge because revenge is giving or paying back the same thing that one got. So Hamlet was not the one who got murdered so it is just an excuse to murder King Claudius.

[cathysjun]

I think that Hamlet used revenge as an excuse. Technically there was no proof whether his uncle killed his dad. Everything like him seeing his dad as a ghost, talking to it, etc, may be just all in his head. There is no concrete evidence that Hamlet found and everything is just his assumtions. His uncle reactions from the play was only his assumtion as well. So he just used his assumtions as an excuse.

[minjaeyang]

An excuse is when you say something to cover up the real reason you did something. For example, when you do not do your homework, you do not tell the teacher the real reason such as I was too lazy. Instead you come up with an excuse such as I got sick. In the case of Hamlet, Hamlet did have a reason to kill which was revenge. He was not trying to cover it up. However, the reason is not legitimate because murder can not be forgiven in any cases.

[hanbikang]

I guess Hamlet wants to believe what the ghost is saying. When someone is a in a really bad condition he or she wants to believe what the others are saying to them. And specially if its the way how you wanted you will totally agree with it.