P. 1
12 angry men

12 angry men

|Views: 206|Likes:
Published by Miguel Mora

More info:

Published by: Miguel Mora on Sep 27, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less







A) Impulsiveness: jumping to premature conclusion. B) Example: At the beginning of the story most of the jury members looked sick and tired of the trial process. They are ready to make a decision most of them think that the boy was guilty, but juror # 8 are not agree with the rest of the members, to him the boy was not guilty. Most of the jurors jump to a conclusion before to think critically about all the circumstances around the case. Fortunately, the vote has to be a unanimous decision, this situation save the boy’s life. 1. – OVERGENERALIZATION A) Overgeneralization: A conclusion not supported by enough data. B) Example: Before to talk about the situation most of the jurors have a conclusion the boy was guilty. They hear all the evidence that the witness show in the trial, but that evidence were not enough to juror #8. He thinks that some of the evidence was not enough and some of them do not make any sense. He needs more information, such as the diagram of the department, time and knife, so he spends the rest of the play arguing to others members to practice patience, and to contemplate the details of the case. 2. - ATTACKING A PERSON INSTEAD OF THE ARGUMENT A) Attacking a Person Instead of the Argument even if subtly done, is a form of name-calling used to direct attention away from someone’s evidence and logic (or lack thereof). B) Example: When juror#8 exposed his point of view about the case the jury members began to attack him. They think that they are losing their time; most of them just want to finish the discussion and leave. Then the old man (juror #9) began to support juror #8 he said “ maybe he is right, let him talk” but juror#3 who is quick to lose his temper, he began to insult the old man he said” please do not pay enough attention to the things that this man said , he is just an old man”. 4. - EITHER-OR-THINKING A) Either-Or-Thinking: Asking members to choose between only two options, as if no other choices existed. B) Example: In this particular case they just have two options it were guilty and not guilty. The foreman said that the vote has to be a unanimous decision. During the first vote that jury members did, they vote guilty but juror#8 vote not guilty this situation make that the rest of jury members lost their patient with juror#8 and the argue began. Juror #8 has to convince the rest of the members to change their mind and with some evidence such as the similar knife that

.he shows and everybody think that cannot be another knife similar. one by one start to change their mind and to understand juror’s #8 point of view.

 ¾¾f°     °fnf°° f° °€ ¾¯f °  ° ¾fnf°–   ¯° f° ° ¾f° ©#¾½°€         .

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->