Ritically assess the potential of rights theory to encompass the recognition of rights for the Non-human animals

a? Critical assessment
a A reasoned comparison of different points of view or conclusions; assessment of the strength of arguments and/or evidence (e.g. rationality; logicality; comprehensiveness; inclusivity)
a The ability to synthesise complex materials in your own words but retain understanding and readability
a A logical structure that
a? Introduces
a? Discusses and analyses
a? Concludes
Referencing
a Any standard method is acceptable but you MUST be consistent.
a Harvard
training/citation/vancouv.pdf
OSCOLA
oscola.shtml
a? Remember that we are ultimately looking for evidence of
a UNDERSTANDING
a JUDGMENT IN SELECTION AND USE OF MATERIALS
a THE ABILITY TO DISTINGUISH A GOOD ARGUMENT FROM A BAD ONE AND TO BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE WHY YOU HAVE REACHED THIS CONCLUSION
a THE ABILITY TO SYNTHESISE THE ABOVE INTO A COHERENT, LOGICAL AND READABLE ACCOUNT
a? Critically assess the potential of rights theory to encompass the recognition of rights for the
Non-human animals

a? What we DO want in each case:
a A reasoned discussion of the extent to which rights theory can be extended to XXX
a This will require attention to terminology (exactly what are you going to treat as a right; are you dealing with legal rights, moral rights or both etc.
a Critical assessment of the likely difficulties that may arise and the extent to which they might be overcome
a Must address both sides of the debate in all three cases

a? What we DO NOT want:
a Mere description without analysis
a Failure to pay attention to definitions
a A collection of extracts stuck together with the odd sentence of your own (even if acknowledged)
a A collage from the internet

a? Animals Arthurs
a Singer, Regan, Midgeley, Jamieson, Francione, Ash, Radford, Scruton, Frey, Duckler