Knightly post 13

Maus and Eating animals use the same rhetorical skills to convince the audience of their argument.  The argument uses a lot of pathos to convey our opinion.  Maus uses pictures to show how horrible things like the holocaust were.  Eating animals doesn’t necessarily use pictures but from reading it we got some pretty gruesome pictures in our head.  Other similarity’s in these two books are that we want to help out whoever is being affected and want to get whatever it is out of that situation.  I believe these books are different then the shallows.  I didn’t really see much pathos when reading it, I just saw a book that gave a bunch of facts and not much to back up the argument.  Or it just wasn’t enough for me to believe in the argument.  Out of the three books Eating Animals uses the most pathos because you just feel so bad for the animals when you are reading about the horrible things that are happening to them.  Even the word choice in Eating Animals made me sick to my stomach.  There was just something about that book.  Although Eating Animals had a convincing argument I still eat meat because it is going to take a lot more to change my mind then a book.