Joshua Rashedah Alexander ENG 112-72 28 March 2014 Rhectorical Analysis Conscious Logic About Unconscious Times Graham

Hancock gives an outstanding exposition in Whitechapel, London during a TedX talk. His presentation is entitled The War on Consciousness. Hancock uses ironclad logic to defend his points of view. He effectively uses metaphors and first hand experience to weave a thick Kevlar-esque thought process that would convince even the most hard-nosed individuals to not only see Hancocks reasoning and theorizing as very rational, but also to question their held fast points of view. Hancocks skillful wielding of the English language, paired with his

proficiency, in reference to the use of multiple forms of logic, make this particular presentation a milestone in the annals in the halls of argument. I would highly recommend this speech to anyone wishing to learn how to effectively and thoroughly contribute his or her own thoughts and theories. Graham Hancock begins his presentation with a brief history of humankind. He states that human beings became conscious nearly 100,000 years ago. This is not stating that humans simply came into existence, but rather that humans became self-aware. He argues that this may have possibly begun through the use of psychedelics, which produced altered states of mind. Our ancestors used psychedelics such a mushrooms, among other plants, to achieve these distorted states. He backs up this claim by showing how certain plants have been illustrated and connected to cave paintings found all over the world. His argument makes use of the ethos appeal during the first three minutes of his speech. He asserts his intelligence and education to show his authority on the subject, as well as present this argument. Hancock effectively shows

Joshua R East 2 his audience that he is not simply some stoner asking for his drugs to be legal, but rather that he is a scholar who has truly done his research. The next phase of his speech is spent explaining the history and use of a drink called Ayahuasca. He notes that this is a psychedelic that has been used for many centuries by tribes around the Amazon in South America. Throughout his explanation of this drug, he discusses how its use is not meant for recreation, but rather for a spiritual journey. Hancock uses the logos appeal during this session of his presentation. He speaks on how Ayahuasca is not an easy drug to drink. Ayahuasca has a very bitter taste and often makes the consumer sick with both diarrhea and nausea. This psychedelic is meant to be a privilege, the exact opposite of a common rave drug. Hancock also speaks on how this medication takes the participant on a journey to meet a Spirit that emboldens the user to change his or her life for the better. There have been countless cases of people who have kicked their heroine and cocaine addiction after taking Ayahuasca. This Spirit shows people how to transcend seemingly insurmountable obstacles in their lives. Many of the addicts are able to break the chains that bound them to their needles without ever having withdrawal symptoms. This line of logic informs the audience that simply because something can alter ones mental state, it does not immediately mean that it is unethical. This idea could be seen as simple rhetoric if pitched from a novice lecturer, but Hancocks first hand experience and educated tone remove all doubt. After laying down a solid foundation that intriguingly illustrates that not all altered states of mind are immediately evil, he also further elaborates on how there are positive consequences, which can promote learning and growth to the partakers. To this point, Hancock has achieved his gained ground through his use of both egos and logos appeals. The performance continues with an excellent demonstration of how to properly use the pathos appeal. He states that he

Joshua R East 3 recreationally used marijuana for over twenty-four years. He states that he wasnt addicted, but rather that he simply did not want to stop with his pestering habit. He attributes his cold-turkey, withdrawal-less stop of cannabis to Mother Ayahuasca, which is the common name given to the Spirit the partaker is introduced to upon the consumption of Ayahuasca. Mother

Ayahuasca shows Hancock his own death, which would come to him if he did not stop his cannabis habit, after partaking of the psychedelic drug. He explains that he is shown that in the after life his soul will be found wanting and sent to hell. This argument is made a pathos appeal because he shows that he has struggled, and that he, despite his vast intelligence and scholastic achievement, was shown how he could improve his life. This story pulls on our heartstrings and echoes in our ears showing that all people are alike; everyone is in need of work. Graham Hancock presents this common knowledge that all humans are fallible, and offers a possible, however unorthodox, solution. His first hand familiarity with Ayahuasca only furthers his already exceptional credibility on the topic of mind altering drugs, and the effects they have on the human psyche. Hancock, after skillfully presenting some of the positive outcomes that derive from the responsible use of particular psychedelics, turns his attention in the argument to the way modern science views the use of mind-altering medicines. Hancock begins this dialogue by asking, why do so many scientists act as if they are fully aware how consciousness works? He states that if science was honest with not only the common people, but also with itself, it would admit that it does not completely understand the way physical beings interact with the conscious state. The problem is that material reduction scientists, who only consider that which can be measured, do not have much, if any, information to give to the argument; simply because they see discussions and experiments on topics such as life after death as frivolous. In fact, very little research is

Joshua R East 4 done on how we interact with death. He tells the audience how conventional science, which looks exclusively at the material world, is unfit for speaking on behalf of the conscious world. Simply put, the consciousness is the part of the human mind that keeps the rest of the body alive, and no one is even close to understanding how it works. This is a refutation, but it is not of the common household variety. Hancock discusses the fact that the vast majority of modern scientists spend very little time discussing the issue of life after death. Hancock argues that this is a serious issue. Without the forethought of how our actions impact not only the people around us, but also people on a global scale, humans are led to be self-seeking. Hancock continues by saying, Millions go to bed every night starvingSix months expenditure on the Iraq War would have solved the problem of the Amazon forever[The West] has severed its connection with Spirit, and unless you reconnect with Spirit you will bring the whole house of cards down around your heads. Graham Hancock draws his talk to conclusion citing the freedom of speech to challenge many different government organizations different rules concerning the use of mind-altering drugs. He argues that sovereign adults rights are being infringed because they are not allowed to choose how to live, or what to experience with their own bodies. He concludes with a superb appeal to logic, stating that we cannot claim to be free if we are not allowed to responsibly use mind-alerting drugs without doing any harm to other people. Graham Hancocks profound argument that the careful, targeted and responsible alteration of consciousness will bring about positive change in the world is deeply moving (Hancock). Making incomparable use of his first hand experiences, as well as his years of dedicated research, Hancock promotes a poignant and compelling thesis, which endorses a

Joshua R East 5 positive and conscious change. Honestly, how many people would care to take a stand against that?

Joshua R East 6 Works Citied Hancock, Graham. The War on Consciousness TedX. London, England. 12 Jan 2013. Speech.