Animal Rights and Animal Experiments: An Interest-Based Approach

This paper examines whether non-human animals have a moral right not to be experimented upon. It adopts a Razian conception of rights, whereby an individual possesses a right if an interest of that individual is sufficient to impose a duty on another. To ascertain whether animals have a right not to be experimented on, three interests are examined which might found such a right: the interest in not suffering, the interest in staying alive, and the interest in being free. It is argued that while the first two of these interests are sufficient to ground animal rights against being killed and made to suffer by experiments, the interest in freedom does not ground a general animal right not to be used in experimentation. Winner of the second annual Res Publica Postgraduate Essay Prize, 2006.     

The construction of authority and authenticity in Islamic discourse(s): contrasting and historicizing contemporary narratives from English Sunni narratives

Throughout Islamic history scholars have put forward cases about the ‘right’ way to understand the faith. Focal to these processes is positioning a scholarly narrative as authoritative and authentic. This article contrasts two scholarly narratives of contemporary Sunni Islam as a means to explore how authority and authenticity are constructed. In addition to a critical discourse analysis, the respective positions are contextualized within their respectively claimed classical scholarship. The article identifies the means through which authority and authenticity are justified and it highlights the divisive nature of the discourses, often driven by carefully selected analogies, exaggerations, and the citing of extreme positions as exemplary of the errors of others. The findings have implications for understanding the intolerant, and sometime violent, interactions between Sunni Muslims.     

Values of British political extremists and potential extremists: A discriminant analysis

Studied the value systems of political extremists and potential extremists, comparing them with the value systems of centrist activists and supporters. Samples of political activists from the Labour, Conservative, Communist and National Front parties were obtained, as well as samples of non-active supporters. The non-active supporters were defined as Potential Extremists, if they supported a centrist party as first choice, but either Communist or National Front as second choice. All subjects completed the Rokeach Value Survey. Discriminant analysis showed that the four groups of activists could be clearly distinguished on the bask of their values. However the values of the Potential Extremists did not especially resemble the values of actual National Front or Communist activists. There were value differences between the Potential Extremists and the centrist supporters; nevertheless these two groups tended to be distinguished by very different values from those which distinguished between the activists. The appeal of value symbols for different types of political involvement was discussed.