Macbeth and Free Will Essay

In Desiderius Erasmuss Defense of Free Will, he refutes Martin Luthers creed that God predestines everyones lives and instead asserts that man alone possesses the government agency to choose his hold path to either salvation or damnation. The looseness Macbeth, by William Shakespeare, raises similar questions did the protagonist, Macbeth, volitioningly choose to commit such atrocities as killing the king and his court to feed his own ambition, or did he merely play the role of a pawn, performing that which fate bid him do?Amid much controversy over this issue, evidence both in Erasmuss critical essay and in the play itself affirms that Macbeth cognitively decides to feign as he does in the play, confirming Erasmuss perspective and suggesting that pile have the ability to dictate their own fate through their thoughts, decisions, and actions. with his interpretation of the Old and New Testaments in the Bible, Erasmus writes in favor of throw overboard will over predestination , a concept that, when applied to the character Macbeth, raises questions near the motives behind his detestable actions.In his essay, Erasmus explores the power of the human (46) to turn away(predicate) from what leads to eternal salvation (46). According to this opinion, Macbeth makes a conscious choice to follow up on a life of crime and blaze, instead of simply pastime his fate. Macbeths plea that the stars hide their fires (1. 4. 57) so that light would not see his black and heavy desires (1. 4. 58) indicates that Macbeth remains aware that his wicked, rebellious will (Erasmus, 48) lies within himself, and he fears the consequences of his pixilated deeds.This very fear of punishment reflects the existence of free will in Macbeth as Erasmus inquires, why should God curse me, when I sinned through necessity? (47). Macbeths clear understanding of the evil that he plans to commit and his fear of comprehend punishment suggest that characters in Macbeth choose their actions as opposed to following their destiny. Macbeths evil actions, however, are not completely driven by an inherent evil nature although he does have free will in the play, he becomes a slave to his ruthless ambition because of his own moral weakness.As Erasmus writes, there are certain seeds of undecomposedness lay in mens minds (50), although the will is perhaps more prepared to evil than to good (50). In other words, everyone possesses both good and sturdy within them, and it is up to the individual person to turn themselves towards, or away from, trustingness (48-9). Macbeths apparently latent moral code surfaces occasionally throughout the first act in his moments of wavering in his violent go under he tells Lady Macbeth that they will proceed no further in this business (1.7. 34) in one of the scenes preceding the murder.However, the manipulative Lady Macbeth must(prenominal) only mention that which Macbeth desires and question his masculinity to crush Macbeths good side and force it to submit to his evil ambition. The ease with which Lady Macbeth extinguishes Macbeths doubt of the evil plan highlights Macbeths weakness for his ambition. Macbeth becomes a slave not to the devil, but instead to the very evil that resides within himself.neither heaven nor hell predetermines Macbeths actions in the play it is in concomitant his inability to compromise his ruthless ambition that ultimately forces him into crime. He chooses to sin of his own accord, and therefore faces his final punishment that sets the world back in order at the end of the tragedy. Through their individual works, Shakespeare and Erasmus imply that creation have free will to determine their own actions, and only the strongest of warmth will succeed in accomplishing the work of God.