Lobster is one of my favorite seafood dishes because of its delicate, flavor-rich meat. However, after reading this article, I changed my mind. “Consider the Lobster” by David Foster Wallace is a controversial article on whether or not it is humane to drop a live lobster into a pot of boiling water. He raised the thought-provoking question of whether it is right to boil a live lobster just as desired. Thus, he had convinced me of his views on logos, ethos and pathos. I believe Wallace uses description to deliberate on the meaning of pain in order to convince and win my heart. He includes definitions of terms and taxonomic references to prove his point as he compares and contrasts different viewpoints on this specific issue. In order for Wallace to get his point across in the first paragraph, he described what the Main Lobster Festival was, he expressed it in the first person, which allowed me to see things from his point of view and to understand how he felt about this subject. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay In the article, it is evident that Wallace tends to display pathos the most, where he includes footnotes and endnotes expressing his opinion and position on a topic. precise segment of the article which allows it to provide a new perspective. To get his point across, he uses many rhetorical strategies that I myself had to consider. His strategies made me think about several other perspectives such as those of lobstermen, chefs and meat lovers. Wallace captures the use of pathos in a way that would be very convincing when comparing and contrasting lobsters to humans. He got me when he said, "The lobster sometimes clings to the sides of the container or even hangs its claws on the edge of the pot like a person trying to keep from going over the edge of the roof." It makes me feel remorseful for the lobster, like I'm the creature placed in a pot of boiling water. Additionally, he compares the Main Lobster Festival to the Nebraska Beef Festival. he cites a few of the festivities, but the one he emphasized most was “watching the trucks arrive and the live cattle being driven up the ramp and slaughtered on the spot” projecting that image into my head. I naturally tended to feel guilty, which was Wallace's main point, as to why one feels bad for the cattle but not the lobster, there is no difference in my eyes. Additionally, it was at this point that Wallace introduced me to the ethos side of the argument where he convinced me that it is, in fact, inhumane to boil a lobster alive when he stated : “It's hard not to feel that they are unhappy or afraid. , even if it is a rudimentary version of these feelings", showing that we should not judge and treat the lobster better or worse based on the level of pain it feels. His perspective led me to consider lobster more by that consideration alone. However, Wallace makes the argument that one might think they have the right to eat a lobster because they are not human. Wallace proves this theory that people hold this hypothesis. During the main lobster festival, a “Test Your Lobster” IQ test was conducted in which it was stated that lobsters have a simple nervous system like that of a worm or a grasshopper. He explained a particular case where he interviewed a man named Dick whose son-in-law happened to be a lobsterman,.