I is Rhetorical Master

Asimov admits that his, “intelligence, then, is not absolute, but is a function of the society [he lives] in and of the fact that a small subsection of that society has managed to foist itself as an arbiter of such matters” (2). Asimov is hesitantly proposing that his “intelligence” may not be so much universal as it is a function of the language at his disposal; language that is useful within only a small subsection of said universe. Furthermore, he implies that higher education impedes access to the alternative intellectual understanding and routes, leaving one vulnerable to the jibes of a mere auto-repairman. Sedaris continues Asimov’s epiphany with a realization of his own, “Understanding doesn’t mean that you can suddenly speak the language. Far from it. It’s a small step, nothing more, yet its rewards are intoxicating and deceptive” (295). Here, Sedaris contends that understanding language is nothing more than the bare minimum requirement for intellectual exchange. More to the point, he asserts that such understanding, is liable to induce unwarranted confidence and create situations in which one is even more vulnerable to rhetorical abuse. Asimov and Sedaris present similar commentaries on language in that they openly recognize its shortcomings through the use of examples from personal experience. Though Asimov is surely well versed in academic thought, he was effortlessly duped by his auto-repairman, “Why, you dumb jerk, He used his voice and asked for them” (2). Likewise, though Sedaris believed he was skilled enough in the French language to take on his cunning instructor, his response, “I know the thing what you speak exact now. Talk me more, plus please, plus” (295) demonstrates otherwise.