Logical Fallacy In Julius Caesar

Shakespeare’s political play Julius Caesar is one in which its namesake, Caesar, is murdered by a group of conspirators. Following this, Brutus attempts to persuade the audience that he acted for the best interest of Rome, claiming that Caesar would have become a dictator. However, the commoners of Rome were never satisfied with the reasoning for Caesar’s death. This was caused due to multiple reasons, mainly which they had already established their support for Caesar and Brutus’ inadequate speech which fails to justify his actions.
The populace of Rome was always on Caesar’s side, even before the events of the play. In the opening scene of the play two tribunes, Murellus and Flavius, encounter a group of commoners who are celebrating Caesar’s …show more content…
Certain aspects of Brutus’ speech are ineffective in convincing the populace who, before this, were completely supportive of Caesar. He fails to give them a logical and just reason for his actions. Brutus uses logical fallacy in his oration, “Had you rather Caesar were living, and / die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live all freemen?” He creates an either-or argument which reduces the issue to having only two outcomes. This case of false dilemma brings forth a non-existent problem since Caesar is not certain to become an oppressive ruler. While this rhetoric strategy is a clever choice to persuade an audience, Brutus uses it on the wrong people. As discussed before, the populace had already aligned themselves with Caesar and they might have thought that crowning him was in the best interest of Rome. Additionally, Brutus simply states that Caesar was ambitious (without evidence) and for this he was killed. On the surface, it appears that the commoners accept this as sufficient reasoning with lines such as, “Live, Brutus, live, live!” and “Caesar’s better parts / Shall be crowned in Brutus”. However, they have not been given any evidence to support this claim and these responses are based solely on Brutus’ questionable rhetoric strategy. This is ironic as it gives Brutus a false impression of their allegiance when their words are really serving …show more content…
However, Antony intelligently and subtly leads them back over to supporting Caesar. After degrading Brutus’ ethos, he reminds the crowd of their love for Caesar, “You all did love him once, not without case; / What cause withholds you then to mourn for him?” This rhetorical question allows him to include the people in his speech. He draws a parallel back to the opening scene of the play where Murellus and Flavius accuse the commoners of having forgotten Pompey. This reminds them of their well-established love for Caesar as they begin to sway back to his side. Following this, Antony mentions the existence of Caesar’s will before refusing to read it to the commoners. This tempts them into wanting to hear it, with them demanding, “You shall read us the will, Caesar’s will!” Nonetheless, Antony still refuses and states that he fears to wrong the ‘honourable men’. In response to this, the commoners exclaim that the conspirators were, “villains, murderers!” and “traitors. Honourable men!” These cries confirm where their true allegiance lies and also shows how Antony has persuaded them with the commoners too using ‘honourable men’ in a mocking manner. The will serves as the final catalyst for the commoners who are enraged that such a generous man lays dead. In fact, they believe Caesar’s death is so unjustified that they commit the radical act of mutiny. When they