Rhetoric can make the same message within a discourse seem to say two completely different

things to two different people. This is because of the rhetorical devices that are being used by
the author. The four things the author points out to be the cause of this is the exigence,
rhetors, audience, and constraints. In every situation, each person involved might have a
different reason for all four of those things, or all four might not match up to them in that
situation, but no matter the discourse all four play a major part in the development of the
situation and how everything plays out. The biggest thing that came to me from the author is
that each individual can have completely different exigence in interacting within a discourse,
but will still have some kind of constraint, good or bad. Also, because of those different
exigences, rhetors have to always be adapting to their environment and to everything that is
going on.
To me, this text really explained how humans interact. For example, when one of my friends
goes to the gym, he is trying to gain muscle and bulk up and my other friend is doing cardio
and trying to lose weight. They both have two different reasons for working out with a trainer
(exigence), but they still fall within the same discourse. Because those two people have
different goals in mind, their trainer (the rhetor) is not going to tell them to do the same thing
or talk to them in the same way. Each individual has to be handled in a way specific to their
needs (constraints) and reasoning for being there. This makes the people working out the
audience for the trainer, but their friends are becoming the audience of their
improvements. This text has now opened up a new way for me to look at life in general
because it puts all of the pieces together and explains why they are that way. This text does
fail to express the reasoning of why people speak and write with certain tones and the attitude
that is used.