answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

This line from Shakespeare's Hamlet reflects the existential dilemma of choosing between life's struggles or ending one's own suffering through death. It explores the contemplation of the value of existence and the mental agony of enduring hardships.

User Avatar

AnswerBot

4d ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: What is the meaning of to be or not to be that is the question whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about Philosophy

What is the meaning of suffer?

Suffering refers to experiencing pain, distress, or hardship. It can manifest physically, emotionally, or mentally and can result from various causes such as illness, loss, or adversity.


What is abstract noun of suffer?

don't now figure it out your self


What is the abstract noun of suffer?

The abstract noun of "suffer" is "suffering." It refers to the experience of pain, distress, or hardship.


What is rhetorical questioning?

A rhetorical question is one that does not expect an answer. It is used as a form of persuasive speech.One example is: "How much longer do we have to suffer this government?" Obviously the questioner is not happy with the government and wants you to believe the same: he is interested in taking you through his own thought process, but not interested in a factual answer.A question that's not meant to be answered although it's asked.A question which the asker does not expect an answer to.A rhetorical question is a question that the questioner makes even though they already know the answer. They are often made to exacerbate dramatic or humorous situations.


Socrates believed that it was better to suffer wickedness than to commit it?

Yes, Socrates believed that it was better to suffer injustice than to commit it because committing injustice would harm one's soul and create inner turmoil, whereas suffering injustice would not corrupt one's soul. He believed in the importance of leading a just life and maintaining integrity.

Related questions

Can you start a sentence with to be?

Shakespear did: To be, or not to be--that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune Or to take arms against a sea of troubles And by opposing end them. So i guess it is ok


What famous shakespearean quote includes an infinitive?

"To be or not to be, that is the question" from Hamlet is a famous Shakespearean quote that includes the infinitive "to be."


What is hamlet trying to decide in his to be or not to be sililoquy?

*soliloquy And he's deciding whether or not it is noble to end his own life "whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer" etc. By "to be" or not, he essentially means "to live, or not to live".


What is meant by the whether clause in Hamlet's To be or not to be speech?

 The other day I read To be or not to be (Shakespeare) -From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (2012 / 05 / 23) which I had happened to print out. It says in Interpretation that the third main point of disagreement about this speech is what the apparent theme of endurance vs. action (" to suffer..or..take arms ") has to do with being and nonbeing, and is further elaborated as follows, "Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer...Or to take arms…" seems clearly to ask whether it is better to be stoically passive to life's troubles or heroically active against them. The trouble is how this relates to 'to be or not to be' ...There is a considerable disagreement over the very question presented here in Interpretation ( how the theme of the whether clause relates to 'to be or not to be'), and I do not think that this quite reasonable question is attached as much importance as it should be.The following is my interpretation of the first few lines of Hamlet's famous "to be or not to be" soliloquy, (To be, or not to be: that is the question:/ Whether 'tis nobler ~/And by opposing end them? [ To die: to sleep; / No more;]).I would appreciate it very much if I could have any comments on it.First of all, I assume that 'to be' means 'to live, to exist, to be alive, or to continue to exist' and 'not to be' 'to die, to cease to exist, or to commit suicide' and that in this soliloquy Hamlet uses 'to be' to allude to life and action and 'not to be' to death and inaction, though he is not talking directly about himself and thinking more generally about life or death; and I discuss the question on the premise that this assumption is correct.The whether clause, which is most probably an amplification, seems generally thought to have much the same meaning as a common Japanese translation of this part: 'Which is nobler, to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them?' But it is unreasonable and I do not agree, because 'To be, or not to be: that is the question.' and 'Whether 'tis nobler ~to suffer ~ , or to take ~?' are then two different questions that have different meanings, and the whether clause does not function as a consistent elaboration on the question of whether to continue to exist or not. I will give a supplementary explanation below.In my judgment, the "or" in line 1 does not parallel the "or" in line 4, and to suffer ~ and to take ~ are two contrasting examples used to explain 'to be', and there is little doubt that Hamlet uses 'to be' to allude to life and action and 'not to be' to death and inaction (like killing himself with a bare dagger)(ll.20-21).  'Not to be' does not imply life and action as some think it does, much less heroic action (like taking arms ~and end them)(ll.4-5); it means death without doing anything.Besides, as is clearly shown by a certain Japanese translation ( Which way of life is nobler, to suffer ~, or to take arms ~ ? ), to suffer ~ and to take arms ~ are both ways of life -courses of action open for Hamlet in his present difficult situation, though noticeably different from each other, stoically passive vs. heroically active. Thus the question of whether to continue to exist or not is again totally different from the question of which is nobler of the two ways of living - two courses of action; there is no logical connection between the two.My (grammatical) interpretation of the whether clause is as follows. Although the pronoun 'it' in 'tis indicates to suffer ~ and to take arms ~ , the whole clause does not mean 'Which is nobler, to suffer ~ , or to take arms ~?' It means 'Is to be nobler (than not to be)?', that is to say, ' Is to suffer ~, or to take arms ~ ( no matter which ) really nobler ( than to die )?' Taken literally, 'to take arms ~' obviously implies life and action, and that heroic action, ("though perhaps with the loss of life") and does not equal 'not to be' as some think it does. So the equivalence is between 'to be' and 'to suffer ~, or to take arms ~' and between 'not to be' and 'To die' (l.5), which is the other alternative not expressed but understood in the whether clause. Thus I do not think, as some do, that Hamlet, without any sort of transition, suddenly starts to contemplate death. He merely begins to talk about the other alternative of nonbeing after talking about the alternative of being; and therefore the whether clause and 'To die: to sleep; / No more;' fit together well and logically and they form a united whole.  I think this is the only way to make the whether clause a more consistent elaboration on the question of whether to continue to exist or not, and that "Shakespearean grammar" would permit this explanation.


Who said Whether its nobler of the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune or by taking arms end them?

A actor or Shakespeare said it 1st in a play called Hamlet by a actor playing Hamlet.


What is hamlet asking in the lines 'whether 'tis nobler opposing end them' that follow 'to be or not to be that is the question'?

Hamlet is asking for the people who are objecting the proposal raised.The other day I read To be or not to be (Shakespeare) -From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (2012/05 / 23) which I had happened to print out. It says in Interpretation that the third main point of disagreement about this speech is what the apparent theme of endurance vs. action (" to suffer..or..take arms ") has to do with being and nonbeing, and is further elaborated as follows, "Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer...Or to take arms…" seems clearly to ask whether it is better to be stoically passive to life's troubles or heroically active against them. The trouble is how this relates to 'to be or not to be' ...There is a considerable disagreement over the very question presented here in Interpretation ( how the theme of the whether clause relates to 'to be or not to be'), and I do not think that this quite reasonable question is attached as much importance as it should be.The following is my interpretation of the first few lines of Hamlet's famous "to be or not to be" soliloquy, (To be, or not to be: that is the question:/ Whether 'tis nobler ~/And by opposing end them? [ To die: to sleep; / No more;]).I would appreciate it very much if I could have any comments on it.First of all, I assume that 'to be' means 'to live, to exist, to be alive, or to continue to exist' and 'not to be' 'to die, to cease to exist, or to commit suicide' and that in this soliloquy Hamlet uses 'to be' to allude to life and action and 'not to be' to death and inaction, though he is not talking directly about himself and thinking more generally about life or death; and I discuss the question on the premise that this assumption is correct.The whether clause, which is most probably an amplification, seems generally thought to have much the same meaning as a common Japanese translation of this part: 'Which is nobler, to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them?' But it is unreasonable and I do not agree, because 'To be, or not to be: that is the question.' and 'Whether 'tis nobler ~to suffer ~ , or to take ~?' are then two different questions that have different meanings, and the whether clause does not function as a consistent elaboration on the question of whether to continue to exist or not. I will give a supplementary explanation below.In my judgment, the "or" in line 1 does not parallel the "or" in line 4, and to suffer ~ and to take ~ are two contrasting examples used to explain 'to be', and there is little doubt that Hamlet uses 'to be' to allude to life and action and 'not to be' to death and inaction (like killing himself with a bare dagger)(ll.20-21).  'Not to be' does not imply life and action as some think it does, much less heroic action (like taking arms ~and end them)(ll.4-5); it means death without doing anything.Besides, as is clearly shown by a certain Japanese translation ( Which way of life is nobler, to suffer ~, or to take arms ~ ? ), to suffer ~ and to take arms ~ are both ways of life -courses of action open for Hamlet in his present difficult situation, though noticeably different from each other, stoically passive vs. heroically active. Thus the question of whether to continue to exist or not is again totally different from the question of which is nobler of the two ways of living - two courses of action; there is no logical connection between the two.My (grammatical) interpretation of the whether clause is as follows. Although the pronoun 'it' in 'tis indicates to suffer ~ and to take arms ~ , the whole clause does not mean 'Which is nobler, to suffer ~ , or to take arms ~?' It means 'Is to be nobler (than not to be)?', that is to say, ' Is to suffer ~, or to take arms ~ ( no matter which ) really nobler ( than to die )?' Taken literally, 'to take arms ~' obviously implies life and action, and that heroic action, ("though perhaps with the loss of life") and does not equal 'not to be' as some think it does. So the equivalence is between 'to be' and 'to suffer ~, or to take arms ~' and between 'not to be' and 'To die' (l.5), which is the other alternative not expressed but understood in the whether clause. Thus I do not think, as some do, that Hamlet, without any sort of transition, suddenly starts to contemplate death. He merely begins to talk about the other alternative of nonbeing after talking about the alternative of being; and therefore the whether clause and 'To die: to sleep; / No more;' fit together well and logically and they form a united whole.  I think this is the only way to make the whether clause a more consistent elaboration on the question of whether to continue to exist or not, and that "Shakespearean grammar" would permit this explanation.


Can you give me a short character impersonation script?

Sure, here is a short character impersonation script: "To be or not to be, that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing, end them." - Hamlet


How many plays and passages did shakespeare write?

He wrote 37 plays that nearly everyone agrees on, and another which most people agree he co-wrote with John Fletcher. Plus there are two plays for sure we know about which are now lost. That makes 40 that we know of. There might be more. A "passage" usually means a part or section of some work or other. "To be or not to be" is a passage, and so is "to be or not to be, that is the question", and so is "To be or not to be, that is the question: whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" and so is "nobler in the mind" and also "slings and arrows" and "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune." Since this one little speech from Hamlet can obviously be divided into hundreds of "passages" and there are thousands of such speeches not even counting the poetry Shakespeare wrote, I think it's safe to say that the number of passages he wrote is countless.


How many plays did Shakespeare and write?

He wrote 37 plays that nearly everyone agrees on, and another which most people agree he co-wrote with John Fletcher. Plus there are two plays for sure we know about which are now lost. That makes 40 that we know of. There might be more. A "passage" usually means a part or section of some work or other. "To be or not to be" is a passage, and so is "to be or not to be, that is the question", and so is "To be or not to be, that is the question: whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" and so is "nobler in the mind" and also "slings and arrows" and "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune." Since this one little speech from Hamlet can obviously be divided into hundreds of "passages" and there are thousands of such speeches not even counting the poetry Shakespeare wrote, I think it's safe to say that the number of passages he wrote is countless.


Did General Lee suffer?

To answer a question we need a what, who, when, where, why, or how. Your question requires a when or why.


What is the meaning of the expression I don't suffer fools?

in this case, the word suffer means allow to exist


What is the meaning of suffer?

Suffering refers to experiencing pain, distress, or hardship. It can manifest physically, emotionally, or mentally and can result from various causes such as illness, loss, or adversity.