The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that Tzachi Zamir makes a convincing case for double vision, the thesis that there is a reciprocal relation between literature and moral philosophy such that literature facilitates moral understanding and moral understanding enriches the literary experience. In §1, I explain double vision in terms of the epistemic value of literature, exemplified by the type of knowledge Zamir refers to as knowing through. §2 shows why Zamir’s interpretation of Richard III is significant to double vision and establishes a criterion of success for that interpretation, whether Richard of Gloucester is what A.W. Eaton calls a rough hero. I address the objections to Richard as a rough hero in §3, concluding that both Zamir’s interpretation of the play and the double vision thesis are convincing.
|Title of host publication||The Routledge Companion to Shakespeare and Philosophy|
|Editors||Craig Bourne, Emily Caddick Bourne|
|Place of Publication||Abingdon|
|Number of pages||612|
|Publication status||Published - 26 Oct 2018|