ABSTRACT
Though the question of knowledge in Shakespeare’s plays often leads to ‘dangers, doubts, wringing of the conscience, / Fears, and despairs’ (Henry VIII, 2.2.26–7), there is yet an experience that many of his characters deem indubitable, immediate and objective: the perception of excellence. There is no doubt about the beauty of Innogen or Hermione, and little about their virtue; none about the martial prowess of Macbeth or Coriolanus or the high perfection of many paintings, props and pageants. Above all, this type of perception often gives ‘assurance’ not only of the individual, but of the general, as Hamlet’s father gave ‘the world assurance of a man’ (3.4.61). However this relationship between individual perception and universal insight, which is pivotal in the Aristotelian model of knowledge, is almost never used without paradox, to the point where Shakespeare seems to place rhetoric above reasoning, and accident above essence. I will argue that these paradoxes derive much of their potency from the way they transgress the basic tenets of Aristotle’s logic and theory of knowledge. Nevertheless, they are not a declaration of dogmatic scepticism, but rather an attempt to put philosophical commonplaces to dramatic use: to make judgment strange, unsure, open to wonder and redefinition and wholly dependent on spectacle.
