Persuasive techniques are commonly used when speaking in the hopes of bringing another to their side in a conversation. Reginald Rose creates a list of goals that he hopes to achieve in the writing of Twelve Angry Men, and uses these to incorporate certain persuasive techniques in the speaking of others in the story. By observing the most essential goals of evidence remembered and juror to juror relationships, Juror Eight most successfully uses ethos as a persuasive technique. While using this technique, he is able to persuade other characters profitably to his side of the argument, thus allowing for the verdict called upon at the end of the story. Therefore, Twelve Angry Men proves that ethos is the most successful persuative technique out of the rest of them.
In many occasions, Juror Eight is forced to explain his reasoning behind his decisions chosen, many of which contradict the rest of the jurors. In one situation, the jurors discuss a piece of evidence where a women claims to have seen the murder occur through the window of the el train. Although most of the jurors find this story told to be true, Juror Eight sees another side. He says, “How can the woman be sure it was the kid when she saw it through the windows of a passing elevated train?”(Act 1, Page 19) Opposing the others, he uses his knowledge of the evidence in order to questions the other jurors’ thoughts. He also says, “How come you believed her? She’s one of them, too, isn’t she?” (Act 1, Page 19) In this quote, Juror Eight shows credibility and consideration to the fact that it may be possible that this woman was stretching the truth. At that point, his appeal to ethos causes some of the jurors to question the relevance in that piece of evidence. Not only is the goal of evidence remembered brought up, but so is the juror to juror relationship between Juror Eight and Juror Ten. This proves that by using ethos, the appeal to others is greater while persuading.
In another act of the play, a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document