Intuition In Twelve Angry Men

Twelve Angry Men exhibits the thought processes of twelve men that rely upon their intuitions on varying levels; some of whom check their intuition, some dismiss their intuition, and some trust it blindly. Of course, absolutism in either direction is not wise, and, in almost any case, moderation will find better results, especially in a court room. Throughout the film, various characters utilize one of these false ways of thought. However, it was characters like Juror Eight, that checked his intuition that saved the accused boy from the death penalty. This shows the power of taking your intuition in moderation and the beneficial nature that can result from doing so. Notable cases of checked intuitions are accredited to Juror Eight and Juror Nine because they both realized that

By the end of the movie, Juror Eight summoned the courage to oppose all the rest in the room and force all of them to check their intuitions multiple times. Some jurors did check their intuitions, but none of them did it independently as the two aforementioned jurors did. Prominent cases of erroneous thought were all corrected, but several of the jurors stuck to their understandings firmly. Juror Four trusted his intuition until the end. He said that he felt that the evidence was irrefutable and dug up more evidence to support his instinct throughout the movie. He defended his initial position until there was so much evidence against him that he could no longer support his argument. Similarly, Juror Seven chose to vote guilty and refused to change his mind because he does not like to be wrong. As we see later on when he does finally change his vote, he admits that he was wrong softly, and with minimal words. This indicates that he was too embarrassed to be seen conceding to another idea, and that he was arguing for the other side of the vote simply because that was his initial reaction. In either of these jurors’ cases,