AI Interprets "The Merchant of Venice"
Shakespeare Through the Looking Glass of Moral Foundations Theory
I suspect that a time-traveling Shakespeare would embrace Artificial Intelligence, perhaps to generate a backdrop for a battle scene in Henry V or a sinking ship in The Tempest—or even for help in rhyming a troubling couplet. But, I wondered, could AI help us understand his plays any better than, say, CliffsNotes?
A quick scan of the internet suggested that most applications of AI to Shakespeare either asked an AI bot to write something—mayhap, a sonnet—in Shakespeare’s style or presented a quiz testing a player’s ability to distinguish a passage written by Shakespeare from an AI-generated passage imitating Shakespeare’s style. It’s all amusing but not especially edifying.
On a more sophisticated level, Prof. Alexa Alice Joubin, at George Washington University, has found AI useful in her class on Shakespeare in film to help students generate good research questions. Good questions, she says, are open-ended and have some “conceptual depth.” An example: “How does this film of ‘Romeo and Juliet’ depict gender dynamics?” You can read more about her classroom use of AI at this link.
For my part, I wanted to enlist AI to probe Shakespeare’s understanding of mind and behavior—particularly how he thought about moral issues. Happily, his work abounds with plots centered on moral problems and dilemmas.1 From among them, I have chosen The Merchant of Venice to examine in this post. So, if it has been a while since you have encountered the play, you may find the plot summary in this footnote to be a good refresher.2
My approach, then, was interdisciplinary. That is, asked AI to look at The Merchant of Venice through a psychological lens: specifically using a framework called Moral Foundations Theory (MFT).
You may remember MFT’s most famous champion, Jonathan Haidt, from my previous post titled “Shakespeare and the Elephant.”3 There we saw how the conscious and unconscious minds differ in the ways they process information and emotions. Now I would like to show you how Haidt and his colleagues have studied how people use these mental tools to make moral judgments—on a continuum ranging from “good” to “bad”—based on six dimensions or “foundations” of morality:
Fairness/Cheating
Care/Harm
Loyalty/Betrayal
Authority/Subversion
Sanctity-Purity/Degradation [While this seems to be two dimensions, people who judge morality on spiritual or religious grounds are also prone to making moral judgments on the basis of purity & cleanliness vs. degradation and disgust.
Liberty/Oppression
Not all people see morality in the same way, of course—which contributes greatly to the political divide in the U.S. Jonathan Haidt notes that liberals emphasize the first two dimensions, while conservatives are more likely to make moral judgments using the last four, as well.
Importantly, Dr. Haidt and his colleagues have also found that these six moral dimensions transcend culture, occurring in diverse countries and cultures around the world. This, he says, suggests that the six moral dimensions arise not from social learning but from the way people’s brains are “wired” at birth.4
My interest, however, lies in a slightly different direction: If the “moral foundations” posited by MFT are truly universal across cultures, do they also apply across time? That is, do they apply to moral issues raised in folk tales, ancient literature, and especially for our purposes, in Shakespeare’s plays?
To explore that idea, I asked Google’s AI to “Analyze The Merchant of Venice in terms of the six dimensions of Moral Foundations Theory. Here is the AI-generated response:
“The Merchant of Venice" can be analyzed through the lens of Moral Foundations Theory, specifically the six dimensions, to understand the play's exploration of moral values and conflicts. The play revolves around issues of fairness, loyalty, authority, and purity, with Shylock's demand for a pound of flesh highlighting a clash between legal justice and compassion.
Moral Foundations Theory:
The play heavily explores the conflict between justice (the legal right to Shylock's pound of flesh) and compassion (the need to show mercy). Shylock's suffering due to his previous wrongs and the suffering of Antonio are central to this.
The core of the play hinges on fairness. Shylock's claim to the pound of flesh is based on the terms of the bond, but the audience questions whether this is truly fair considering the circumstances and the inherent imbalance of power.
Shylock's actions and the reactions of the Christian characters highlight the importance of loyalty to one's group (religion, social status). The play shows how in-group loyalty can sometimes lead to prejudice and injustice towards out-groups.
The authority of law is challenged in the play, particularly when Portia (disguised as a lawyer) uses her authority to circumvent the strict legal interpretation of the bond. This raises questions about the relationship between law and justice.
The play touches on issues of purity through the actions of Jessica, who abandons her father's home and religious beliefs. This can be interpreted as a transgression of traditional purity norms, which are tied to religious and social roles.
The play explores the concept of liberty and oppression, particularly in Shylock's case. Shylock feels oppressed by the Christian society, and his desire for revenge is a manifestation of this oppression. The play also examines the concept of freedom of choice, especially in the context of religious beliefs and social expectations.
In conclusion: By examining "The Merchant of Venice" through the lens of Moral Foundations Theory, we can better understand the play's complex moral landscape, the conflicts between different moral intuitions, and the enduring themes of justice, mercy, and prejudice that resonate even today.
Surprisingly, I received somewhat different answers when I asked the same questions over again. Similarly, a slight change in wording might take the answer in a new direction. Here, for example, is a portion of the response I received when I simply asked AI to analyze The Merchant of Venice from the perspective of Moral Foundations Theory (without specifying that I wanted answers in terms of the six dimensions):
In-group/Out-group Dynamics:
The play also explores the in-group/out-group dynamics of Venetian society, where Shylock, as a Jewish moneylender, is marginalized and viewed with suspicion by the Christian characters. This creates a sense of injustice for Shylock, who experiences prejudice and discrimination, while the Christians, bound by their own moral codes, often act in a way that is detrimental to him.
Moral Ambiguity and Resolution:
The play's resolution, where Shylock is forced to convert to Christianity and renounce his wealth, leaves the audience questioning the true meaning of justice and the role of moral compromise. Portia, the embodiment of Christian morality, ultimately manipulates the legal system to achieve a seemingly just outcome, yet the resolution is not without its own moral ambiguities, as it also involves the forced conversion of Shylock.
Challenging Moral Assumptions:
"The Merchant of Venice" challenges the audience to confront their own moral assumptions about justice, fairness, and compassion, by presenting a complex and often contradictory narrative. The play explores how these moral foundations can be manipulated, distorted, and even used to justify injustice, raising questions about the nature of morality itself.
Here are a few more questions about Shakespeare’s psychology for you to explore with AI:
How would conceptions of morality in Shakespeare’s audiences differ from those of audiences today?
Which of the six foundations in Moral Foundations Theory might be the most important in understanding The Merchant of Venice?
Which of the six foundations in Moral Foundations Theory are most relevant in understanding antisemitism?
How is Macbeth’s concept of morality different from Shylock’s?
My conclusion: By now, we have all learned (or should have learned) that AI has its quirks and limitations, so we need to apply a critical eye to AI output. Nevertheless, AI does, in my experience, have applications backward in time. So, it is a good place to start when crafting a paper or a presentation on a literary topic. But remember: the key to getting a good response from an AI “assistant” seems to be asking a good and complex question. Again, this seems to hold special promise for students dealing with interdisciplinary projects. And if you are interested in psychology, I would say much the same about Moral Foundations Theory.
To my mind, AI stands as a useful resource alongside Wikipedia, Google Search, and Asimov’s Guide to Shakespeare—a place to start, but not an end in itself.
If you are enjoying these posts, please consider getting a copy of Psychology According to Shakespeare, by Philip Zimbardo and me, published in 2024 by Prometheus Books and available at bookstores everywhere.
Here is a peek at the table of contents, showing the featured plays that illustrate each psychological topic:
Psychology According to Shakespeare
Prologue – Why Shakespeare and Psychology?
Introduction – Shakespeare’s Psychology and the Roots of Genius
Part I: Nature vs. Nurture
Chapter 1 – Nature-Nurture, Neuroscience, and the Brain of the Bard: The Tempest
Chapter 2 – The Ages and Stages of Man (and Woman): As You Like It
Part II: The Person vs. the Situation
Chapter 3 – Henrys, Humors, and the Psychology of Personality: Richard II – Henry V
Chapter 4 – Social Influence from Stratford to Stanford: Measure for Measure
Chapter 5 – Heroes Ancient and Modern, Major and Minor: Othello
Part III: Into the Mind
Chapter 6 – Sleep and Dreams: A Window into the Unconscious: A Midsummer Night’s Dream
Chapter 7 – Mental Illness and Other Ill Humors: Richard III
Part IV: Reason vs. Emotion
Chapter 8 – Emotion, Motivation, and Elizabethan Love: Love’s Labour’s Lost
Chapter 9 – Reason, Intuition, and the Dithering Prince of Denmark: Hamlet
Epilogue – Psychology, Shakespeare, and Beyond
Other examples of moral issues in Shakespeare’s plays:
Hamlet grapples with the question: Which is the better moral path, ”To suffer / The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, / Or to take arms against a sea of troubles”?
Macbeth equivocates over the wisdom of killing Duncan and becoming king, or not and remaining but a thane;
Several plays involve mistaken reports of infidelity leading to jealousy and, in one instance, murder: Othello, The Winter’s Tale, Cymbeline, and Much Ado About Nothing.
Two other plays, All’s Well and Measure for Measure, resolve difficult sexual situations comedically with the “bed trick,” a plot device in which (usually) two women switch places to trick a man into sleeping with the other woman;
Also in Measure for Measure, Shakespeare explores two other moral issues: Is it moral for Angelo to demand sex from a nun in exchange for sparing her brother’s life? Is it moral for the novitiate Isabella to save her virginity by refusing the bargain for her brother’s life?
In Pericles, the moral issue involves incest;
In Richard III, the would-be king justifies his murderous path to the throne of England in terms of retribution for his ill treatment by others;
And Julius Caesar presents the moral dilemma involving the assassination of a man who would bring tyranny to Rome by becoming emperor.
Antonio, a Venitian merchant, needs a loan from the Jewish moneylender, Shylock, to help his friend Bassanio court Portia, who is wealthy because of an inheritance. Antonio expects to repay the loan when his ships, full of valuable merchandise, arrive in Venice. Shylock agrees on the condition that if Antonio defaults, Shylock can take a pound of flesh from Antonio’s body.
Word arrives that the ships have been lost, and Antonio must default on the loan. Shylock demands his pound of flesh, forcing the matter into court (where Portia, in disguise, takes the role of the judge). Shylock ignores Portia’s recommendation of mercy, but she saves the day by invoking a clever legal technicality: Shylock can have his pound of flesh but absolutely no blood. Moreover, he must give up his fortune in recompense for threatening Antonio’s life.
Shylock departs as a broken man. Everyone else gets married.
You will find the post at the link here:
Shakespeare and the Elephant
Because literary critics have used Freud’s ideas about mind and behavior so extensively in interpreting Shakespeare, I proposed in my previous post that Shakespeare was no Freudian. By that I meant that I have found nothing in his writ…
See Haidt’s book: The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. Vintage, 2013.
..."Everyone else gets married."
This was a grand read.
Thank you.