The Importance of Use Logic
Emotions and logic play an important role at the moment of decision making. In the play “Twelve Angry Man”these factors are used to determine the future of a young teenager. At first the jurors use emotions to conclude the boy’s guilty of his father murder. However throughout the play, the jurors start to use logic to expose the mistakes they made in the first decision. They used logic and analyze the evidence realizing they dismiss important details. Even though emotions are part of the human nature sometimes they can blind our judgment.
Important decisions based on emotions can lead to mistakes. In the play “Twelve Angry Man” the jurors base their decision of declaring the boy guilty on emotions. The foreman is afraid the kid will be set free and he will harm or kill other people. The foreman talks about a man who was set free being guilty of murder and how he cannot be put in jail. Fear makes the foreman assume the boy is guilty. Other emotion that played an important role at the jurors decision was nostalgia. Juror number three bases his decision on an experience he had with his own son. The juror assumes because his son hit him in the face and then runned away from home all teenagers are ungrateful and have a bad behavior. Apathy is the emotion that is mostly determining the future of the
Even though emotions are part of the human nature sometimes they can blind our judgment. At a very early age humans are taught to control their emotions to have a better relationship with other humans. Logic plays an important role in life because it helps us think and understand situations in our daily life. Logic helps us to discern between decisions that can affect us directly. Use logic instead of emotions at the moment of making decisions helps us to take most appropriate decisions because we think in what ways we can be affect on a positive or negative
Many characters have hopes and dreams which they wish to accomplish. Of Mice and Men has two main characters that go through obstacles to get what they want. In the beginning it is George and Lennie running away trying to get a job. Once both George and Lennie have a job they try to accomplish their dreams. Unfortunately they both can't get their dreams to come true since lennie does the worst and George has to shoot Lennie. Steinbeck uses characterization, foreshadowing, and symbol as rhetorical strategies to make George's actions justified.
12 Angry Men is about 12 men who are the jury for an 18 year old accused of murder. The judge states in the opening scene that it is a premeditated murder in the 1st degree, if found guilty will automatically receive the death penalty. The 18 year old male is accused of killing his father with a “one of a kind” switch blade, in their home. The prosecutors have several eye witness testimonies, and all of the evidence that they could need to convict the 18 year old male. In the movie it takes place on the hottest day of the year in New York City. There are 12 jurors whom are to decide if the evidence is enough to convict the teen of murder in the first degree. In the first initial vote it is 11-1. The only way that the jurors could turn in their votes was if there was unanimous vote either guilty or not guilty among the 12 jurors. As the movie progressed the jurors ended up changing their minds as new evidence was brought to their attention by simple facts that were overlooked by the police and prosecutors in the initial investigation. Tempers were raised, and words flew, there was prejudice and laziness of a few of the jurors that affected the amount of time it took to go over all of the eye witness testimonies and evidence. The eye witness testimonies ended up being proven wrong and some of the evidence was thrown out because it was put there under false pretense.
Twelve angry men is a play about twelve jurors who have to decide if the defendant is guilty of murdering his father, the play consist of many themes including prejudice, intolerance, justice , and courage. The play begins with a judge explaining to the jurors their job and how in order for the boy to be sent to death the vote must be unanimous. The jurors are then locked into a small room on a hot summer day. At first, it seems as though the verdict is obvious until juror eight decides to vote not guilty. From that moment on, the characters begin to show their true colors. Some of the characters appear to be biased and prejudice while others just want justice and the truth. Twelve Angry Men Despite many of the negative qualities we see
People tend to base characteristics and personalities of people pretty quickly. Most people base their opinions on stereotypes. Reginald Rose and his play “12 Angry Men” demonstrate how people are quick to judge other people based on looks. In the movie all twelve jurors must decide if a young boy is guilty or innocent. At the beginning of the movie/play-write, only one juror, juror eight, decides the boy is innocent. Based on the evidence gathered from the case everyone agrees the boy is innocent except one man, juror three. He eventually breaks down and tells the truth. The viewers can tell that this movie/play is full of emotions. Each of these emotions can be described as something more than what comes to the eye.
Twelve Angry Men is a depiction of twelve jurors who deliberate over the verdict of a young defendant accused of murder, highlighting many key communications concepts discussed throughout the semester. One of these concepts was the perspective of a true consensus, the complete satisfaction of a decision by all parties attributed. An array of inferences were illustrated in the movie (some spawning collective inferences) as well as defiance among the jurors. Each of these concepts play a role endorsing, or emphasizing the other. We can analyze the final verdict of the jurors and establish if there was a true consensus affecting their decision. In turn, we can analyze the inferences during the deliberation and directly link how they affect the consensus (or lack thereof). Defiance among the jurors was also directly
The Twelve Angry Men was about a boy who was accused of stabbing his father to death in a argument. In the beginning of the trial all twelve of the juror's voted guilty. Many of the juror's were mean and did not care about the boy's future they just wanted to get the trial over with so the juror's can do what they wanted to do. Later in the case one of the juror's realized they were messing with a boys life and his future was all up to them. So a juror realized that some of the information that a witness brought up had to be false. So they analyzed the information and came to the conclusion that the boy could not have stabbed his father the way he did because one of the juror's had seen many knife fight's in his backyard and you can not stab someone downward with a switchblade. Also another witness said that the knife that the kid had could be bought anywhere. The juror's discriminated the boy because he lived in the slums , he has a criminal record and he was always fighting with his dad so they just assumed he was the one that killed his dad.
This essay will compare and contrast the protagonist/antagonist's relationship with each other and the other jurors in the play and in the movie versions of Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men. There aren't any changes made to the key part of the story, but yet the minor changes made in making the movie adaptation produce a different picture than what one imagines when reading the drama in the form of a play. First off, the settings in the movie are a great deal more fleshed out. In the play, the scene begins with the jurors regarding the judge's final statements concerning the case in the courtroom and then walking out into the jury room. In the movie, the audience is placed in the role of the invisible casual observer, who for perhaps the first 5 minutes of the movie, walks throughout the court building passing other court rooms, lawyers, defendants, security officers, elevators, etc.
Emotion is power. Being emotional can sometimes be paralyzing. We have seen how different characters make decisions, what they are based on, and if they sometimes falter off that path.
I am using the articles “Declaration of Independence” and “Abigail Adams’ Last Act of Defiance.” They both use the ideas of ethos, logos, and a little bit of pathos. Both articles use stylistic devices like alliteration, anaphora, and metaphors.
In the play “Twelve Angry men”, the story line presents a variety of perspectives and opinions between twelve very different men. Some are more likely to be pointed out as prejudice, and others are more focused on reaching fair justice. Clearly, it is quite difficult for different people to vote ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ in unity when coming to a fair decision. In all of the twelve jurors, I have chosen Juror 3 and Juror 8 for contrast and comparison. I believe that Juror number 3 is a very opinionated man, with more differences than similarities comparing with Juror number 8.
Twelve Angry Men, is a play written by Reginald Rose. The play is about the process of individuals and a court case, which is determining the fate of a teenager. It presents the themes of justice, independence and ignorance. Rose emphasises these three themes through the characters and the dialogue. Justice is the principle of moral rightness or equity. This is shown through juror number eight who isn’t sure whether or not the boy is actually innocent or guilty, but he persists to ask questions and convinces the other jurors to think about the facts first. Independence is shown through both juror number three and ten. They both believe that the defendant is guilty until they both realise that they can not relate there past experiences with the court case. Ignorance is shown throughout all the jurors during the play, it is also brought out through the setting of the play.
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
“Please raise your right hand to take the oath” the officer says. Silence washes over the courtroom. “Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, (so help you God/under pains and penalties of perjury)?” “Yes” She says. She sitting right next to the judge, microphone right in front of her. She sits there looking around the courtroom. She sees him there sitting calmly with no worries about what’s happening. She wonders if they’ll believe her, they have to believe her, there's evidence. I hope the jurors would see past his good boy facade. I hope they really see him for what he is. A rapist. I get introduced to the court and so the nightmare begins. The trial begins, and the lawyers begin
The movie “12 Angry Men” examines the dynamics at play in a United States jury room in the 1950’s. It revolves around the opinions and mindsets of twelve diverse characters that are tasked with pronouncing the guilt or innocence of a young man accused of patricide. The extraordinary element is that their finding will determine his life or death. This play was made into a movie in 1957, produced by Henry Fonda who played the lead role, Juror #8, and Reginald Rose who wrote the original screenplay. This essay will explore some of the critical thinking elements found within the context of this movie, and will show that rational reason and logic when used effectively can overcome the mostly ineffective rush to judgment that can be prevalent in a population. The juror that seemed interesting is Juror #8, who was played by Henry Fonda. Juror #8, or Davis, is an architect, the first dissenter and protagonist in the film. He was the first one to declare that the young man was innocent and he managed to convince the other jurors to see his point of view. Durkheim states that when we respond to deviance, it brings people together (Macionis, 2013, p. 159). We affirm the moral ties that bind us together, which was seen in the movie. At first, almost all of the jurors were so bent on convicting the young man based on their feelings, but they then started to analyze the facts and they came together to make their final decision.
Juror 8 utilized emotional intelligence in relating to the other 11 jurors and effectively influencing them to change their votes. Emotional intelligence is defined by Psychology Today as the "ability to identify and manage your own emotions and the emotions of others" ("Emotional Intelligence," n.d.). Using emotional intelligence, juror 8 maintained his own emotions and remained calm. He also used emotional intelligence to draw out the emotions in others, which ultimately led to influencing the jurors by creating doubts in their minds regarding the verdict. In "Minority Matters," the authors point out that juror 8 "senses that juror 3 is losing credibility with the others as well as his temper" (Flouri & Fitsakis, 2007, p. 459). Juror 8 began to antagonize juror 3, pushing him to angrily yell that he will kill juror 8. In response, juror 8 stated, "You don 't really mean that" (Flouri & Fitsakis, 2007, p. 459). Juror 8 used juror 3 's emotional outburst to prove the statement could be made without following through on the action. The results of this action caused juror 8 to gain more credibility and also more votes for not