Cicero's Model: Animal Rights

Rhetorical Strategy Assignment

🐕 Case Brief: Winnemac Laboratory vs. KAHTA

Winnemac Laboratory (WL) Background: The WL is studying the effects of certain chemicals on bone marrow with the goal of finding better treatments for leukemia, which is often life threatening for humans. There are around 100,000 new leukemia cases per year. WL reports that if allowed to continue their research, they will be able to begin human trials for their treatments in the next five to ten years. WL was founded in 1958 and owns over 500 patents related to medicine. The current President is Dr. Marcia James, a leukemia survivor.

WL's Animal Testing: Currently, WL uses dogs as test subjects. The dogs are either bred specifically to be laboratory animals or collected as strays that would otherwise be euthanized. During the test, dogs are injected with chemical cocktails and monitored for organ failure. In some cases, bone marrow is extracted from the dogs—because bone marrow cannot be numbed, this can cause significant pain. Over the past ten years, WL has performed experiments on approximately 6,000 dogs.

KAHTA's Position: The Kilgore Association for the Humane Treatment of Animals (KAHTA) is attempting to sue WL for their experiments on dogs. KAHTA does not argue that all animal testing is morally wrong; instead, they claim that the amount of pain and discomfort experienced by the dogs is unacceptable. They claim that stray animals are not appropriate test subjects (KAHTA's mascot is Waffles, a former stray/test dog with one eye and a crooked tail). They further claim that WL has exaggerated the possible benefits of their leukemia treatments. An outside estimate indicates that the leukemia treatment being studied may only benefit 2% of all patients.

WL's Defense: WL responds by pointing to the fact that the state of Michigan permits testing of pharmaceutical products on "non-pet animals." Although that phrase is ambiguous, they argue that the dogs qualify as non-pet animals because they were either bred specifically for experimentation or were strays and therefore essentially wild. They point to the gains for science that animal testing has resulted in in the past. They compare their use of dogs to the use of rats and rabbits, which are also sometimes kept as pets but are not considered "pet animals" under the law. Finally, they claim that all of their experiments are monitored by an animal welfare specialist (KAHTA rejects the authority of the specialist because she is paid by WL, which affects her neutrality).

Your Role: Your group has been hired as a public relations firm for KAHTA. Your job is to get the public on KAHTA's side by preparing a televised speech using Cicero's Model that persuades the public that KAHTA's position is morally and legally correct and that their goals deserve attention and support.

📚 Instructions

Use bullet points to outline KAHTA's argument following Cicero's six-part structure. You can reference the case brief above, the Crash Course video on animal rights, or develop your own arguments. Focus on establishing credibility, presenting facts, making logical arguments, and appealing to emotions.

Editing Tools

Rhetorical Appeals Guide

ETHOS (Credibility)
LOGOS (Logic)
PATHOS (Emotion)
Click on an appeal above to learn how to use it effectively in your argument.
1 Introduction
Establish your credibility, and convince the audience to identify with you and your message.
Focus: Your credibility (ethos) - Why should people trust KAHTA and you as their spokesperson?
• [Click Edit Mode, then add your bullet points here] • Consider KAHTA's mission and values • Think about what makes them trustworthy • Establish connection with audience
2 Narration
Outline the facts of your argument clearly and straight away.
Focus: Outline your arguments (logos) - What are the key facts about this case?
• [Present the facts about WL's experiments] • [State what KAHTA discovered] • [Include relevant statistics and details] • [Keep it factual and objective]
3 Division
Explain what is to be proven on both sides of the argument.
Focus: What you are trying to prove (logos) - Frame the central question clearly.
• [State what KAHTA needs to prove] • [Acknowledge WL's position] • [Frame the central ethical/legal question] • [Set up the debate clearly]
4 Proof
Make your case, point by point. (Include at least three points)
Focus: Explaining the points of your argument (logos) - Your strongest evidence and reasoning.
• [First main argument supporting KAHTA] • [Second main argument with evidence] • [Third main argument with reasoning] • [Additional supporting points] • [Use logic, evidence, and ethical principles]
5 Refutation
Break down your opponent's argument. (Include at least three points)
Focus: Address oppositions (logos) - Counter WL's main defenses systematically.
• [Address WL's "non-pet animals" argument] • [Counter their scientific benefits claims] • [Challenge their oversight/monitoring claims] • [Address any other WL defenses] • [Show weaknesses in their reasoning]
6 Conclusion
Sum up your strongest points and arouse emotions.
Focus: Make an appeal to the emotions of your audience (pathos) - Move them to action.
• [Summarize key points powerfully] • [Appeal to audience's values and emotions] • [Include vivid imagery or stories] • [Call for specific action] • [End with memorable, moving statement]