Caesar Gladiators

Decent Essays
During the second debate, the major question discussed during this debate is the question of whether Julius Caesar should be assassinated and what would be the effects of assassinated the leader of the current Roman republic. Julius Caesar is the self-proclaimed “dictator for life” and that has upset many of the Roman citizens. During the debate, there were strong arguments made by both teams. These arguments use strong logos, ethos, and pathos to convey their arguments on the decision to assassinate Julius Caesar. The gladiators all made strong claims that Caesar should be assassinated based upon their fear that he will become a tyrant and too powerful for the Roman republic to be able to still function as a republic. However, the imperators…show more content…
During the speech done by the Roman Senator Jillian, she uses pathos by claiming that Julius Caesar is too powerful and uses the emotional appeal of scaring the citizens to make her argument very strong. Jillian claims that “If you do not assassinate Caesar, you will regret it.” Using this emotional appeal makes her argument very convincing and ensures that the citizens’ emotions are triggered when hearing these words. The fact that the people will regret it if they allow Julius Caesar to continue living and becoming more powerful. This argument further strengthens the argument for the gladiators and weakens the argument for the imperators. Furthermore, the Senator also uses ethos by convincing the ethical appeal of the listeners during the debate. The main example that she uses in her argument was the example about how she works with Julius Caesar on the daily basis. “I am here to give you a different perspective, I work with Julius Caesar every day and I see his dirty work.” This uses ethos because it proves that this Roman senator is a very credible source in the argument on if assassinated Julius Caesar is the right decision for the Roman people. Lastly, Jillian makes great use of logos by using many facts about how Julius Caesar has done a lot of dirty work and upset a lot of the Roman people. “Caesar went to Egypt, married Cleopatra and…show more content…
Rachel who is a Roman mother made very strong claims to her pathos. As a Roman mother, Rachel used the emotional appeal to the citizens to further her argument on why saving the life of Julius Caesar would help her children live longer and have a chance to survive. Also, she used logos by claiming that “most soldiers die in a battle and the rest of injured really badly.” Using this factual claim that most soldiers did not survive helps her argument greatly.
Another member of the imperators, Jill uses a rhetorical question to help the listeners understand how killing Julius Caesar would affect her family. She claimed that “I could not see someone killed and have children lose their father. How could you live without a father?” The rhetorical question makes the listener understand her perspective and helps us understand how her life would be different if we decided to assassinate Caesar.
In summation, both of the gladiators and the imperators did an impressive job of stating their case whether Julius Caesar should be assassinated or not. In the end, I think that the gladiators did a great job of making their argument and I voted to kill Caesar because of the arguments that they presented before the
Get Access