Hmmmm

During the first couple pages of the second chapter I found myself confused, but hoped to understand more as I read along. I unfortunately did not understand the connection Ramage was attempting to make between identity and rhetoric. I know that we all use rhetoric in our individual lives, however, I did not feel Ramage explained it that way. I felt his example about the tree falling was interesting, but that it should have not been did the tree really fall if you don't see it. It is obvious the tree fell. What the real question should have been, is if you are not there to hear the tree fall, did it really make a noise when it fell? I expect the class discussion will heighten my understanding of the reading.