Burke is a theorist for what he discovered in his studies but more importantly in the questions he asked. He “reframed” the study…. I would argue he “de-framed” rhetoric in a genius way. One could never say that rhetoric is everything and anything, because then it would be nothing; but the questions he asked has probed an infinite amount to follow, hence taking the limitations off the study. Helen Keller definitely developed knowledge and wisdom for the world but more importantly she probed a word to question everything we know, in a reflexive and personal way. She broke physical limitations of feminism and masculinity because she in a sense was a blank slate. Her political views were de-framed by everything we know. All the influence of the rhetorical process were almost entirely irrelevant to her. She gave us a blank slate and forced us to a imagine a world otherwise unimaginable had Helen not brought it into existence. They type of influence of Keller and Burke are the same in that they open a whole new world of questions; however the scope and gravity of the two are extremely different. Putting these two unlikely theorist into context furthers both their initiatives even further, which is something I did not see possible.