Summary : ' Twelve Angry Men '

1601 Words Oct 15th, 2015 7 Pages
Jackson, Daizia
Professor Runkle
English 1C
15 October 2015
Proper Jury Duty A normal jury room consists of twelve jurors discussing, and colliding opinions about a particular case. In the play; Twelve Angry Men twelve jurors were placed in a room doing just that to determine exactly how innocent a 16 year old boy is after being the blame for his father’s death. However, to begin with eleven of the twelve jurors felt as if the young man was guilty supporting the disciplinary sentence of a 1st degree murder charge that results in an automatic death penalty. Surprisingly, the 8th juror did whatever it took to discuss the evidence and determine if reasonable doubt was a possibility, while the others locked in their vote without analyzing and justifying their vote. As a juror it is important to uphold integrity, respect others views and opinions, vote honestly, and provide clear evidence, but however the jurors in the play failed to do so; as the ideal juror would. Throughout the play the jurors used several different fallacies as they failed in areas, in which a juror shouldn’t. One fallacy that was used the most throughout the entire play was the personal attack fallacy. The personal attack fallacy is when there is a substitution for a reasoned evaluation of an argument, or attack against the person representing the argument. So, therefore the individual is discredited and not the argument. As a juror it is not fair to base your vote on this fallacy, for the simple fact the…

More about Summary : ' Twelve Angry Men '

Open Document