In other words, when does it become wrong to kill a human and why?
General Guidelines: The most important part of the question is why. I am looking for an explanation, rather than merely a recitation of facts. If you don’t explain and justify the things you say, you will not get a good grade. So, if you tell me that a heartbeat matters, you had better explain why a human heartbeat matters more than a rat heartbeat; or why we don’t think a heartbeat matters when the patient is brain-dead; etc.
References to the textbook may be made via simple parenthetical referencing. For example: Singer argues that the principle of equality must be extended to non-humans (569). References to outside sources is permitted, but strongly discouraged; in such instances, full bibliographical information is necessary.
Always paraphrase where possible; use direct quotation only as a last resort. I want to know that you understand an argument, and you putting it in your own words demonstrates that—quoting a textbook does not.
When writing about other authors’ view, I am looking for what is called a critical exposition. A critical exposition is one that presents the argument clearly, succinctly, and with attention to relevant details and concepts. It is thus more than simply a rehash or summary, as a good critical exposition will show how and why a given argument works; rather that merely repeating the assertions made.