Hamlet's Hastiness: a Harbinger of Horrors

Much has been made in class about Hamlet's perceived tragic flaw. That is, his inability to act quickly and decisively. However, just to be a contrarian, I plan argue the exact opposite: not only is Hamlet's indecision about his course of action a justified human response to his situation, but it is also true that the worst tragedies in the play occur when Hamlet acts rashly without considering other possibilities. Indeed, it can be argued that the play would not have the tragic ending that it does had Hamlet simply thought a bit more before acting.
First of all, while it is easy to ridicule Hamlet for not acting when, from the audience's perspective, it is fairly obvious that Claudius is guilty, it is important to look at the larger perspective of the potential act. At the time of play, Hamlet is still a young man who has probably never even seriously considered killing another man, much less actually doing the deed. And yet, he is being told to kill a blood relative by, of all people, a ghost that happens to look like his father. Even considering Hamlet's mental state and natural suspicion of his uncle, killing another human being simply because a ghost tells him to is somewhat hard to justify. And when one considers the social and religious ramifications of killing one's uncle (not to even mention the political implications of killing the King of Denmark), it is perfectly understandable that Hamlet wishes to acquire further evidence before doing something so drastic and unalterable.
In addition, when Hamlet does depart from form and act drastically, it almost always ends in failure and tragedy. For example, when Hamlet is confronted by Ophelia in Act 3 scene 1, he assumes that Ophelia is attempting to end their relationship and rashly yells at her. Not only does Hamlet lose a chance at love as well as a invaluable ally to his revenge plot, but he also seals Ophelia's fate, causing irreparable mental and emotional damage that eventually leads to her suicide. Of course, the most obvious instance of Hamlet acting rashly in the first four acts is his stabbing of Polonius, which was a terrible act not only because of the act itself, but also because of its effect on the rest of the plot. After hearing about his father's death, Laertes vows to kill his father's assassin, thus giving Claudius a useful ally and a means to kill Hamlet without getting his hands dirty. Who knows how long Hamlet's revenge plot might have gone on without Laertes drawing him into a duel to the death. For this reason, it is not a stretch to suggest that had Hamlet simply thought a bit more before ramming his sword through the curtain and killing Polonius, the story might have had a very different ending.