I decided to go with the following video…
Video – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDWEkzaBULQ
The dialogue of the full scene – http://strivinglife.com/words/post/Waking-Life-Chapter-14—Ants.aspx
I personally just felt as though it could yield itself too much analysis rhetorically because it explores philosophy a field that is chocked full of rhetoric as it is by definition a field that needs rhetoric to be well understood. Think, if someone where to approach you asking you weather or not you were real, if your knowledge memories are real he would need to be a good orator. This person approaching you would need to know how to appeal to you to get you to agree with him, thus, he is using some form of rhetoric.
I would say that in taking a close look back at the reading words I could connect would be…
Ethos-in that they name a philosopher in trying to give the “ant” theory credibility, thus, they are giving reference to a person well known and respected to give their ideas credibility.
Pathos-In that the claim is we are too much like “ants” in our communication. We should want to speak to one another as we all hold so little power on the world the best we can do is live our lives and get to know those around us. It appeals to pathos because it is stating that we as humans are so small in the big scheme of things we should want to be connected to people, to know them as a true human and not in a superficial form.
