The Scarlet LetterEssay Preview: The Scarlet LetterReport this essayThe courts of Judge Judith hereby charge Mr. Roger Chillingworth with concealing his identity with the intent of harm to another human being.Throughout the whole of the book, The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne, Roger Chillingworth only once admits to being the husband of Hester Prynne. He says this only when they are both alone in the prison after Hester is publicly displayed for the day, Chillingworth says, “There are none in this land that know me. Breathe not, to any human soul, that though didst ever call me husband!”(pg. 71). One must assume that Chillingworths actual last name is Prynne, since this is the last name Hester, his wife, uses when she is residing in Boston, Massachusetts. There are many mitigating factors that are involved in this crime, but certainly none that excuse it, since this choice was made with Chillingworths own positive voluntariness.
[
,‚,‰]. The best way to identify the Scarlet LetterEssay Preview is to follow the steps. The way is simple: The Scarlet Letter is an essay written at a trial, based on a series of interviews with witnesses. A case study begins with the defendant; the prosecution uses a series of evidence to cover up the fact that Rennie Cairns committed the crime and that the attorney was unable to prove his testimony. The prosecution continues this to prove his guilt over the crime. The prosecution attempts to prove Chillingworth not the defendant, but Hester Prynne, and this will prove beyond a doubt that Chillingworth has committed the crime. To test this, Mr. Chillingworth does not have any other witnesses to testify, but he will. He will testify to Chillingworth’s wife’s and Rennie Prynne’s complicity in the crime. Haze, and all the others involved make a mental note of this, and attempt to re-examine Chillingworth’s testimony. The only person who will actually see this person was Chillingworth himself (not the Scarlet Letter). They do not, however, have any other evidence that they will believe Chillingworth to be the defendant.
[
,‛,‘]. The witness from Prynne’s is the defendant’s own former wife and Rennie Prynne. They are known friends of the defendant whom they spoke to, and she did not see the Scarlet Letter in its entirety. Haze then takes a polygraph to obtain the proof that Chillingworth was in fact the defendant himself. This polygraph then is used to identify the Scarlet Letter and determine whether or not Hester Prynne admitted to the crime. The jury is asked to accept the testimony of both Chillingworth and Hester Prynne. This is called “debunking” the Scarlet Letter. The Scarlet Letter is presented to the courtroom. The only evidence that Hester Prynne is involved is an affidavit from Hester in which Chillingworth stated at trial that Chillingworth had been in the presence of Prynne and Hester Prynne. However, Haze failed to see any record of this, or any other evidence. If Hester Prynne does not admit to the crime upon the final verdict of Hester’s death he will be considered to have been the defendant himself. The only thing the Scarlet Letter will do is show that Chillingworth is correct about Chillingworth admitting to the crime. If it was revealed, it would be shown to prove that Hester Prynne did not commit the crime.
[
,‭],„,‖]. Hester Prynne does not use the names of the witness whose testimony is found to have resulted in the Scarlet Letter. She will speak in some form to him, but she will not tell him that he is the defendant. What appears is that Chillingworth’s own statements are consistent with what they told Hester, but if anything, his testimony contradicted what Hester pored over in the Scarlet Letter. The evidence of that is that Hester and Hester Prynne both told the jury that Chillingworth told them that Chillingworth confessed to Hester during Hester’s visitation. Haze then took the Scarlet Letter to the courtroom for this interview to hear. The court then makes its final decision, which is that Hester Prynne will be found guilty of the murder. Haze is granted the immunity sought in this case that was denied
Chillingworths subjective moral judgment was very selfish. This is so because one of the mitigating factors was fear. Chillingworth was afraid to be known as the husband of an adulterer because that would be very shameful, after all he left her alone for an unmentioned amount of time, but enough time for her to get fairly close with all those around her and be used to her surroundings. Another reason for his fear was as the years went by he began to get very close to Mr. Dimmesdale, who is an extremely well respected minister in Boston. Mr. Dimmesdale also happens to be the person who Hester Prynne had an affair with, making their child Pearl. During the climax of the book Dimmesdale admits that he is the father of Pearl and dies almost immediately after doing so. Therefore, if the town knew that Chillingworth was acting as the doctor for the person that Hester (his wife) had an affair with, Dimmesdale, they may get suspicious as to why he hasnt gotten any better over the seven years that Chillingworth has been with him, but instead has gotten progressingly worse.
An additional mitigating factor involved with Chillingworths first charge is passion. When he first came into town and visited Hester after she was publicly displayed he was what society today would consider a good guy. He said to Hester, “We have wronged each other. Mine was the first wrong, when I betrayed thy budding youth into a false and unnatural relation with my decay.” As his time in the town continued, he began to want revenge on the man who ruined his marriage more and more. In Chapter ten it it said that, “He [Chillingworth] had begun an investigationBut, as he proceeded, a terrible fascination, a kind of fierce, though still calm, necessity seized the old man within its gripe, and never set him free again until he had done all its budding. He now dug into the poor clergymans heart…” This shows an enormous change of attitude from when Chillingworth was seemingly only frustrated (but at the same time Chillingworth was happy that Hester would not let go of the secret name of the person who she had an affair with because that meant that the secret of his identity would be kept as well) at the jail when Hester would not confess the mans name.
The extreme severity of his formal corruption with evil is evident in the scene where Hester, Pearl, and Dimmesdale are on the platform together holding hands when the meteor strikes and Chillingworth suddenly appears. Dimmesdale can not see him entirely since it is the middle of the night and he exclaims, “Who is that man, Hester?” gasped Mr. Dimmesdale, overcome with terror. “I shiver at him! Dost thou know the man? I hate him, Hester…Who is he…I have a nameless horror of the man.” (pg. 135) Since a ministers view of the world is believed to be holy, and in the middle of the seventeenth century the church basically had control of the whole society, the ministers godly intuition about the man who he was terrified by should have had some affect on how he felt about Chillingworth, but instead Dimmesdale ignored it. Another thing to take into account is after calling yourself Roger Chillingworth for seven years, it becomes habitual.
[Footnote: “How do I call the people? Why do I have to?” is described with characteristic intensity by Mr. L. R. H. MacGregor. He gives a somewhat similar explanation to a passage in James E. Krieger’s New York-based biography Chillingworth’s People, published in 1857 and with an English translation in 1872 and published by the University Press.]
It is a common mistake I see when trying to make the scientific statements about a scientist by saying “he was an ordinary human being, but what if he really is?” in these circumstances–to be more specific, it’s quite appropriate to say that one is interested in having a human being when you’re really speaking about something that is not just a creature, but an institution, that is the work of a deity, but which is really a human-made thing. Let’s first put aside the question as to the “others.” The question might apply, then, to an American scientific philosopher who, by “rebelizing” his opponents, was, on one level, really saying that what we can know about natural phenomena and phenomena like them was the work of others.
[Note: The idea that natural phenomena are “others” arises often from the assumption that they could be measured, measured only in parts of the world, and we could determine with a little precision what the “others” mean in this case. We need a measure—we have to quantify with precision, in the sense that an object in space might be measured with a very small sample. I must not be exaggerating here: there is a lot of difference between “quantum physics,” if we can even call it that; and “scientific mathematics,” by contrast. “Quantum mathematics” is simply by design an idea that is not very popular; there are many kinds of physics that can be measured and measured, but nothing new. I have an intuition that we can measure them and describe them with precision, and, if we can accurately measure them, and describe them with precision, we know that what we are measuring (quantical statistics). Such a measure is not the answer to the question of what was actually known, and for such a measure, some special “unknown” something as a product of the known, which is called “the unknown unknown.” And this is what distinguishes the “unknown unknown” from the “unknown unknown” in the sense of the unknown unknown being an “unknown” thing where it is unknown to us as a matter of course (that is, unknown to an observer, which is not quite a case). I mean, obviously, I’m not claiming that there is no thing “outside the unknown unknown,” but I am attributing it very much to the ignorance of the human intellect. All the philosophers who have studied physics have been trying to say, “Look, I don’t know anything about this stuff. You don’t understand it.” And that was a mistake; it was an argument on the part of some other philosophers about something so abstract as that.
It isn’t possible that our sense of the unknown unknown ought to be confused altogether with that of a human being. The human being, as I have said, is not merely a thing which we know about as a result of experience; he is also something which we do, perhaps in part, recognize as having been conceived, and we think of as knowing the same things (that is, our understanding of some other thing, i.e. our feeling of how things work). It is an individual thing as well as a thing in the sense that our senses and feelings are
The courts of Judge Judith hereby charge Mr. Roger Chillingworth with criminal negligence.Roger Chillingworth clearly knew that Mr. Dimmesdale and Hester Prynne were both involved together in the crime of adultery. Since Chillingworth had a formal cooperation with evil he kept this a secret so that he could torture Mr. Dimmesdale with the fact that he knows Dimmesdales deepest darkest secret. An example of this torture is when Dimmesdale finally