Arguments are the pinnacle of progress, development and change. People with conflicting ideas and beliefs constantly engage in this activity. However, did you know that arguments actually boil down to a science? In the 4th century BC, Aristotle theorized that a well-formed argument must include the following: ethos (an appeal to ethics, what is right versus what is wrong), pathos (an appeal to emotion), and logos (an appeal to logic and logic). sense). This theory, so widespread, even influenced the success of the arguments in Shakespeare's works. In Act II of Julius Caesar, Decius and Calpurnia clash over the question of whether Caesar should participate in the Senate. Although Calpurnia used strong pathos, Decius used pathos and logos in combination which proved more powerful (as it appealed to Caesar's pride and provided logical reasoning), and ultimately led to Caesar attending the Senate. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Calpurnia's first attempt to convince Caesar not to appear before the Senate comes in the form of highly detailed images of her terrifying dream. She hopes that by using pathos, she can scare him away from attending the meeting. Part of his description says, “Who rained blood on the Capitol” (9). He is trying to tell Caesar that his dream foreshadows his death in a way that would cause fear. Although Caesar is a man of war and violence, she recognizes that he has a softer side and wants to appeal to that aspect of him. However, Caesar replies that he does not fear death, which forces Calpurnia to try from a different perspective. Calpurnia's second attempt to convince Caesar comes in the form of another appeal to Pathos. She begs him not to go to the Senate and pleads, “Let me, on my knees, prevail in this.” (34). After realizing that Cesare does not care about his own safety, Calpurnia informs him that she would be very sorry if he left and is willing to take any blame for his absence. He hopes that Cesare cares more about his wife's feelings and is willing to change his mind for her. Decius, on the other hand, takes a different approach than Calpurnia. He begins his argument by providing a logical and alternative interpretation of Calpurnia's dream: "Your statue pouring blood into many tubes, in which many smiling Romans bathed, means that from you the great Rome will suck revitalizing blood" (47-50 ). Decius' use of simple logos to explain the meaning of the dream is very powerful in convincing Caesar. If the dream was actually a prophecy of Caesar's success, why would he try to thwart it? Decius' argument is also supported by the fact that he is known as an intelligent man and advised Caesar closely in the past. Furthermore, Decius also uses pathos to counter Calpurnia's pleas. He uses his knowledge of Caesar's wishes and foreshadows, "To give this day a crown to the mighty Caesar." (56). Decius is not only telling Caesar that if he goes to the Senate he will be rewarded with what he wants most, power, but he is also playing on his pride by calling him "mighty Caesar". Decius is very clever in the way he structures his words which makes Caesar desperate to follow his advice. By using such personal and powerful pathos, Caesar plays into Decius' hands. Decius had a more persuasive argument because he used both strong pathos and logos while Calpurnia only had a semi-strong pathos argument. Decius' argument was quick, intelligent, logical, and exactly what Caesar wanted to hear. There are many examples of the smart persuasive tactics of.