Legal Dogmatic Analysis on the Protection of Canines and Felines through the Use of Neutrosophic N-alectics

Abstract

This project is about the limitations and failings of current legal systems. Animal welfare and animal rights protection laws are complementary yet antagonistic, and shortcomings exist irrespective of a partial imposition of biocentric ideals. The project's relevance stems from an increase in international animal abuse and a social need for more comprehensive legislative measures to afford canines and felines legal persons (subjects). In contrast to the assessment of current legislative failures, which fail to acknowledge the indeterminacy of meaning, this project uses neutrosophic n-alectics as a novel investigative vehicle to consolidate disparate findings (positive law versus eco-legal actions). This operates through a qualitative comparative approach to assess case law in three countries (Ecuador, the United States, and the European Union), revealing tributaries of uncertainty relative to classification efforts (sentient being, movable property, etc.). Ultimately, findings suggest that n-alectics can 1. Deconstruct the legal binary (subject/object), 2. Establish a continuum for levels of legislative protection based on culture, 3. Establish malleable legal norms that prioritize human needs and animal welfare. The primary contribution asserts the ability to transcend the reductionism of current legal efforts to re-conceptualize a malleable public policy paradigm relying upon neutrosophic logic (truth-indeterminacy-falsehood). Such contributions serve more than unconceived ideas for legal dogmatica but as tangible means to adjust national and international legislation.