Was Julius Caesar ambitious to a fault? (W.S. Play)

Very well worded. I have to admit, I did make a huge mistake saying Caesar was afraid of Casca. You"re right, it"s Cassius. However, let me say that you are stating your ideas over again, but with just complicated wording. And let me also point you just basically destroyed your own argument by stating "I'm not denying the fact that Caesar was ambitious." This debate is about whether or not if Caesar was ambitious! "Is Caesar's ambition a legit reason for having assassinated him?" only has to do with Brutus" and the other conspirators" perspectives about Caesar. You just tried to change the whole debate. This debate is whether or not if Julius Caesar"s ambition was to a fault that he is purposely misleading the people for his own good. Since you"ve made your own rebuttal, let me rebuttal your rebuttal. 1. I won"t rebut this since it"s true and I"ve already admitted my mistake. 2."Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look; such men are dangerous." Caesar may be telling Antony why Cassius shouldn"t be trusted, but that doesn"t mean Caesar is not afraid of Cassius. There is no reason for a ruler as powerful as Caesar to want men that are fatter (satisfied), unless if they are afraid that person is up to something. The fact that Caesar pays so close to Cassius in extreme detail means that Caesar is suspicious of Cassius. He calls Cassius dangerous because he is afraid of what Cassius is thinking. "I rather tell thee what is to be feared than what I fear, for always I am Caesar." This quote from Caesar leads back to Caesar"s ego and facade. He wants to seem brave and strong to the people. He wants the people to not know his weaknesses. He is scared to the point he has to act as if he is not afraid. "For always I am Caesar" is an attempt to cover his fear of Cassius. Why? Because being Caesar does not mean he cannot be afraid. 3. You used outside information. You did not use the evidence given from the text. In the play, Caesar immediately got a seizure when he noticed the people are happy that he doesn"t want the throne. Though history does state he had seizures, the question is, why does Caesar have the seizure right when he notices the people are happy he is not going to be a tyrant? He offers his throat to be cut, then falls to the floor. If you want to go with outside information, let me point out that heavy emotions are one of the causes of seizures. Seizures do not happen without a reason. They occur because something that has to do with the brain has caused the brain to over conduct electricity. This is supported by the heavy emotion because when looked in the text, there are no signs of other causes of the seizure. 4.You are correct, Decius Brutus does come up with good reasons, but those good reasons are what make Caesar go because they benefit his ego and facade. A crown would not just add more power, but it would also show supreme power and leadership, making the people follow him. Remember, Caesar always wants the better for himself, that"s why he went with Decius Brutus" reasons. Not only did he go to the Senate because of Decius Brutus, but he also was planning to go in the first place. When there was no heart found in the beast, Caesar himself mocked the gods. He thinks the gods are trying to make him look like a coward. It is his love and trust of Calpurnia that makes him resist once. In the end, Caesar goes to the Senate to not look like a coward and to keep up with his ego and facade by following his duties as consul. 5.Caesar refusing the crown is proof he may be a modest king, but what about his ego and facade? Who rides a throne back to his city after winning a battle? Who would celebrate his victory in becoming sole consul in the public after winning a battle? Who offers his neck as the sacrifice after rejecting the crown three times? If he was to be a modest king, why would he be enthusiastic with Decius Brutus about going to the Senate and accepting the crown? If Caesar were to be a modest king, he wouldn"t be easily flattered for the better of his personal appearance to everyone around him. 6. He calls himself as constant as the north star can mean he has respect for the law, but this also goes back to his ego and facade. Any action or statement by Caesar is always seen or heard by the people. Any flaw that Caesar has will weaken his ego and facade. "I could be well moved if I were you." shows that if he were someone else, he would be moved and that he would not be as constant as the north star. If you"re calling yourself something important, isn"t that also you representing yourself as a higher power than others? Calling yourself something important does not define yourself as a "very law-abiding person" and definitely does not give anyone "amounts of respect". 7. Caesar attacks the volcano of Pompeii?! To expand the boundaries of his nation?! What?! I have no clue what you mean! I think you are talking about Pompey! And Pompey had no extra land! He was originally co-consul of Rome with Caesar! There is no point of fighting Pompey except for more power! There is nothing given to the people! Yet the people are not even reliable because they used to support Pompey! Once Caesar defeats Pompey, they jump on the bandwagon and support Caesar! And just because when a ruler expands his kingdom, doesn"t meant it"s for the welfare of the citizens. I"m pretty sure you can google that kings who were absolutists and taxed the nation to the point that the king himself is the only one rich! Thus our instance can justify Caesar"s ambition. Your argument is based on repetition and reason, no supporting facts. You countered yourself by stating that Caesar is not ambitious and then saying Caesar is ambitious. You tried to change the debate when we weren"t even talking about Brutus! We were talking about Caesar himself and his ambition! If we were talking about how Brutus"s reasons were justified in killing Caesar, it would"ve stated been the topic. But Brutus was never mentioned in the topic and it only asked for whether or not Caesar was ambitious. Therefore, I am firm that your argument is invalid as you led us off topic and tried to restate your ideas using different words with the same reasoning, but with no supporting facts. You went from Caesar is not ambitious to saying you"re not saying he is not ambitious in saying he is not ambitious. I don"t mean to say you are not a good debater, but you destroyed your own argument.