In the article "Consider the Lobster", David Foster Wallace argues against the cruel manipulation of lobsters by basing his thoughts on the annual "Maine Lobster Festival". Wallace argues that the ethical questions that arise from the gratuitous and painful deaths of the lobsters manage to reconcile the festival participants. Wallace diffuses moral issues by being quite concerned with the ethical treatment of animals. He presents thoughts and states that lobsters feel no pain or self-preservation, which is reasoning intended to blind the eye rather than an unappealing argument. In the article he used several rhetorical devices to present the controversies over whether it is humane to kill a lobster in a painful and distressing way. Wallace develops some arguments using pathos, including footnotes and endnotes in his thoughts and position on the specific area of ​​the article. The technique allows him to develop a new perspective. Wallace uses rhetorical strategies that he may need to contemplate. This approach leads him to reflect on different points of view, including that of lobsters, chefs and meat lovers. Wallace has captured the use of pathos in ways that can be convincing in comparing and contrasting lobsters to humans. He gets readers' attention when he states that "the lobster sometimes clings to the side of the container or even hooks its claws on the edge of the kettle like a person trying to keep from falling over the edge of the roof." The statement gives the reader a strong sense of remorse for the lobsters as if they were the ones placed in boiling water. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Wallace compares the "Lobster Festival to the Nebraska Beef Festival" and places more emphasis on "watching the trucks pull up and the live cattle get driven 'down the ramp and slaughtered right there.'" Wallace uses this point to make the reader feel guilty when he realizes that he is only thinking of an advertisement for cattle and not for lobster. Try to highlight the fact that there is no difference between the two creatures using the techniques presented readers to the part ethics of the topic by implying that it is humane to boil a lobster alive by stating that "it is difficult not to sense that they are unhappy or scared even if it is a rudimentary version of these feelings." Wallace shows that people should not judge and treat the lobster, depending on the level of pain. There is also some argument made using logos as a rhetorical device. In the article it is argued that lobsters are not human beings and therefore there are no ethical considerations when dealing with them. The reader wonders and concludes that his lobsters are not human, so other creatures such as cats or cows should be treated the same way the lobster is handled. The logos are introduced when Wallace claims that lobsters can send a sense of pain to the brain just like humans. Hence, an appeal presented by Wallace based on logical reasoning. Wallace used several rhetorical strategies to demonstrate that people treat animals in unethical and inhumane ways. The use of ethos and pathos is convincing and shows how ingenious the article is. Wallace uses this point to make the reader feel guilty when he realizes that he is only thinking of an advertisement for cattle and not lobster. Try to emphasize the fact that there is no difference between the two creatures.