week 9 - final project - Final Project Comprehensive...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Final Project – Comprehensive Argument Analysis 1 Final Project – Comprehensive Argument Analysis Melissa Krol CRT - 205 January 19, 2010 Instructor: Amy Hankins Axia College of the University of Phoenix
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Final Project – Comprehensive Argument Analysis 2 Axia College Material Appendix E Critical Analysis Forms Fill out one form for each source. Source 1 Title and Citation: The Case for Strong Animal Rights Regan, T. (1996). The Case for Strong Animal Rights. Opposing Viewpoints: Animal Rights . (E. A. Harnack, Ed.) San Diego: Greenhaven Press. 1 Identify the principal issue presented by the source. The rights and intrinsic value of animals is being violated and the whole system of farming and experimenting on animals should be stopped. 2 Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this. The author is biased he continuously compares humans to animals and states that animals are the same as humans that they also are “experiencing subjects or life.” The author also uses harsh explanations to express his opposition to the farming and production of animals and the experimentation of animals for the benefit of humans. The author also never mentions the humane things that are being done or the laws in place to protect animals. 3 Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exist, explain how you determined this. The author’s explanations, definitions, and examples of why animals have “inherent value” I found to be vague. He states that animals have souls and also states that anything to have “inherent value” we must believe that all who have “inherent value” have it equally. When I think of the word inherent I think of the term “being born with” The author confused me while going on and on about “inherent value” that I almost believed his statements. 4 Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning. I would need to know more about the author to actually make an educated decision as to if he is credible. He is a professor and has written other works on philosophy. At this point based on what I know about the author I would not say he is a credible source even though it seem he did much research in writing this article he is still not an expert on animals or the types of animals being used for medical research or the fill our stomachs. He has not and does not work for the humane society or any other organization that would make his work credible. 5 Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this. This piece is full of rhetoric, the author uses so many rhetorical devices that there are just too many to list, so I will list some that caught me right away. He plays on your emotions by continually pointing out the way animals are treated causes them to suffer. He plays
Background image of page 2
Final Project – Comprehensive Argument Analysis 3 the morality key also by implicating that it is immoral to use animals as resources/human benefit. He also uses
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/09/2010 for the course CRT 205 crt 205 taught by Professor Darren during the Spring '10 term at University of Phoenix.

Page1 / 9

week 9 - final project - Final Project Comprehensive...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online