The play The School for Scandal by Sheridan and Burke's A Philosophical Inquiry explores human nature and the complexities that emerge from social interactions, or perhaps more internally, from our own disposition. Sheridan's satire tackles the scandal of fashionable London society of 1770 with classic characters, such as the flirt, the gossip, the wastrel, the bore, and the rich uncle, among others. In The School for Scandal, personified names, witty dialogue and shots intertwine, creating a successful play. The thesis of this essay aims to compare both the play, specifically the final act, and Burke's Inquiry, and to explore their similarities and their respective ways of representing human emotion and human nature in their own ways. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay. Fundamentally, Burke raises an important explanation for why humans act the way they do, due to his philosophical inquiry focused on sympathy, and its effect on tragedy and imitation. He states that "objects which in reality would shock, are tragically... the source of a very great species of pleasure", essentially stating that any pain inflicted on a person will always trigger a person's sympathy, almost without s to realize it. Clearly, this idea reflects a London society whose very existence, at least in Sheridan's plays, depends on the scandal and disappearance of others. From the two antagonists, Lady Sneerwell and Joseph Surface, who seek to destroy the relationship between the frivolous and indulgent Charles Surface, to the deceptive double servant Snake, who all live for intrigue and sabotage, all prove Burke's theory, insinuating that the Humans, essentially, thrive on the misfortune of others. Additionally, Burke raises the importance of "imitation", in which there is a consensus about "belonging" that is not necessarily the product of societal influence, but rather something that is engraved in our human nature. a comparison can be made to Sheridan's play through its characterization, most overtly in the character of Mrs. Candour, who can create the theme of hypocrisy, despite her little or no presence on stage, due to her supposed disapproval of the gossip despite his ruthlessness in his spreading of gossip. gossip. She directly demonstrates Burke's theory of imitation, as she spreads rumors primarily because it was indeed fashionable, and perhaps a little for her own pleasure – something Burke discusses again in his investigation. Sheridan's intentional use of satirical comedy and hypocrisy allowed him to correct social absurdities – perhaps by acting as a social commentator, much like Henrik Ibsen in his play A Doll's House about inequality between the sexes in the physical and emotional sense, or even like Arthur Miller in the play All My. Threads that ask the question: what is more important, family or your role in society? Indeed, these plays address their respective issues more seriously, which is exactly what Sheridan avoids doing, which might be more successful in Burke's eyes. The debate on the “sublime” defined as “the contemplation of a landscape or a dramatic tragedy is often painful and threatening”. Burke might have argued that if Sheridan avoided his satirical style, he could have had a deeper and more intellectual effect on his audience, meaning he would have achieved his theatrical goal more successfully. However, like Sheridan's play and the Philosophical Inquiry ofBurke have different forms, catechizing the question, is there still a valid comparison between the two? Although their forms may differ, there can still be a strong synergy between the two texts, as Burke's analysis provides central theories of human feeling, all of which are fundamental to Sheridan's play. As for reception, obviously both works together have received both positive and negative reactions. criticism, authority over their texts, and ultimately their ability to faithfully reflect a reality successfully. By focusing on the final scene of Sheridan's play, where the plot is clearly explained to the audience, we can unravel all the lies and sabotage through the involuntary admission of guilt (or in the case of Lady Sneerwell, understand a character left without any other choice). Critics such as James Thompson claim that "it is, moreover, a poorly constructed, or at least very loosely constructed, play with two distinct plots clumsily grafted together", which is true, as Moore fills in "Life by Sheridan” with extracts from notes and drafts of two separate pieces – one containing the machinery of the scandalous college, which might have been called “The Slanderers,” and the other setting before us “The Teasles and Surfaces ". This lack of cohesion and the difficulty in finding a tangible plot contrasts entirely with Burke's writings. Of course, his works have received massive evaluation and add immense magnitude to literary works; even his writing style and fluidity are appreciated "wrote wonderfully, with an incredible freshness of images and an inexhaustible passion - a passion informed by principles". One could infer that Burke understood society as Bookman University explains: “Burke understood that the modern world had lost its center, that it was in intellectual and spiritual disorder. He smelled the rise of totalitarian ideological thought during the French Revolution and its consequences. Burke's full understanding of the world he lived in allows him to explore, define, and explain certain emotions and the reasoning behind them. Therefore, Burke can reflect a reality with authority and with concrete evidence, whereas Sheridan simply reflects the society he lived in in a romanticized, witty, and playful way. Nonetheless, in order to critique both works with respect to reality, it is important to understand the difficulty of defining "reality" as a concept – Young argues that "literature is thus consumed by the ideological concerns of critical perceptions "of current reality", meaning that reality is a personal way of thinking, it is defined by a variety of influences varying from person to person - This means that Burke's philosophical inquiry does not than reflect a reality he believes in, and the same approach must be taken to any critical analysis of the works of Burke and Sheridan. This is an essential factor in comparing the two works: but both raise important questions in their own way. In the overall voice of Burke's investigation, it takes an informative tone while simultaneously asking the reader to think about their own actions in certain situations, using interrogative statements such as "But suppose a fatal accident occurs produce… who would never have been happy to see London". in all its splendor? which is a more direct way of encouraging thought, rather than the spirit shown in Sheridan's play in the last scene "And may you live as happily together as Lady Teazle and I intend to do! " with its satirical tone. ».