Convinces brutus a friend of caesar’s to turn on him in fear of a republic. The conspirators killed caesar before the shocked senators and spectators. In brutus speech he claims that he didn 't love cesar any less by killing him he just loved rome more. Brutus begins building his credibility to the roman people by using rhetorical appeals that persuade the audience to believe that he did the right thing by killing caesar. His use of logical appeals weakened his credibility because it seemed like he was putting the blame on other people instead of taking responsibility for his own actions.
He also used another rhetorical element called rhetorical questions. Rhetorical questions were important in this speech because it got the people to self-evaluate and really consider if they believe that Caesar 's actions justified for him to be murdered. Throughout Antony 's speech he is trying to discredit the conspirators who pose Ceasar as an ambitious man who will enslave everyone and lead Rome to ruin. Antony counters that by describing Ceasar as a person who will weep the loss of someone and asks the peoples if "this in Caesar seem[s] ambitious" (53). By Antony asking that question, the people are reevaluation everything they knew about Ceasar and are being swayed to believe that he was not ambitious.
In addition, he believes that “we just have to check that the act we have in mind will not use anyone as a mere means, and, if possible, that it will treat other persons as ends in themselves” (O’Neil, 2008, p. 113). This principle acts as a moral code implying that one should never treat a person merely as a means to an end. Overall, Kantian ethics focuses and recognizes the importance of the value of humanity. His categorical imperative ultimately leads to a “kingdom of ends,” in which norms that deny the value of humanity are not permitted. In my opinion, it would be difficult to disagree because most individuals value their own life.
“I thrice presented him a kingly crown, Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?” (3.2. Line 99-100). Antony is stating facts right now, he reminds the crowd of how they loved Caesar so much, that they were willing to just him the crown. He also reminds them that Caesar refused the crown and asks if that is ambition because it is not. Logos justs adds to all of the other techniques he used to win over the crowd and make then into a the mob that Antony
Rhetorical devices aid in persuading the reader into believing what is being told to them. In the play Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, Shakespeare utilizes these devices to show how other characters persuade their audiences. Caesar was growing too strong, and the Senate, the branch of government, grew wary of this rise to power, so they plotted to kill him. Brutus, one of Caesar’s good friends, aids in this scheme, and speaks at his eulogy. He sways public opinion of himself by using an abundance of rhetoric to portray himself as a selfless man.
Thus, justice would mean, every person who is responsible to deliver justice should be obliged to perform his craft properly and eliminate any person, who within it does alien things, to harmonize the whole process. Craft justice is not instrumental to justice, it is justice in itself. Therefore, Plato says that the substance of law will not change only the approach will change. We can consider his theory as a kind of harmony between the individual being and the state as a whole. He viewed justice as an idea, an attribute of the mind, which itself in a
Caesars fatal death by his strong governing peers may have been because Caesar’s hamartia is his arrogance, and this is shown consistently through his life span in the play. Since Caesar has a strong political following and position in Rome’s state, he has much arrogance in his personality and this arrogance is his hamartia which has a fatal ending to his life. If Caesar was more cautious about how he treated other people with little respect then maybe his arrogance would not have been hamartia. When the soothsayer warned Caesar about the Ides of March, if Caesar was not ignorant and arrogant then he would’ve believed the soothsayer which could of saved his life. With Caesar being so arrogant he believed that nothing bad would have ever happen to him, but if he noticed but the signs of what was to come in the Ides of March and how suspicious Cassius, Brutus, and the other congressmen were then he may of not come to a fatal death.
It is essential to state the material facts to enable the opposite party to know the case he is required to meet. Failure to state the material facts will result in dismissal of the suit. There is a difference between ‘material facts’ and ‘particulars’. Particulars support the material facts and they do not affect the decision to be taken. Pleadings should not state the evidence- Pleadings should contain a statement of material facts on which the party relies but not the evidence by which those facts are to be proved.
At first, even the conspirators thought Antony was just a follower of Caesar. Brutus says that “Antony is but a limb of Caesar” (Shakespeare 2.1.172) Brutus and the others think that Antony will just abandon his loyalty to Caesar, however they were wrong. After Caesar 's death, Antony 's loyalty to him only grows stronger. Instead now Antony will take the place of Caesar and use his power to get vengeance for Caesar 's death. To Caesar 's body, he says “Domestic fury and fierce civil strife shall cumber all the parts of Italy.” (Shakespeare 3.1.
Would you trust someone who kills their best friend for the good of their country or some guy who thinks they knew the leader? Exactly, you would want and trust a leader who would do anything for the good of their country. Julius Caesar was murder by Brutus and the other conspirators but they said it was for the good of Rome. Brutus and Antony both gave a speeches over Julius Caesars death to appeal to the plebeians. Brutus funeral speech was a more effective speech than Antony because his use of ethos, pathos, and logos made the plebeians focus on his words more.