12 Angry Men (Movie of 1957)
12 ANGRY MEN
1. Choose two characters from the Jury. In separate numbers, examine and analyze the two juror's reasoning. a. Check if his reasoning fulfils the standards of thinking. b. Identify some errors in his thinking. c. What do you think led the juror to commit these errors in his thinking with respect to the case he is judging?
Jury # 9
Jury number 9 was the old man seated next to Henry Fonda at the table. These 12 different jurors were seated at a long table to decide the fate of a young man who was allegedly being accused of murdering his own father. These people were randomly chosen to come together and tell which side they choose and to express their views about the case. I personally think that Jury number 9 does not fully fulfil the standards of thinking. Based from the readings the standards of thinking “Whenever we think there is always a purpose, within a point of view, based on assumptions, leading to implications and consequences. We use data, facts, and experiences to make inferences and judgments, based on concepts and theories to answer a question or solve a problem.” Juror number 9 obviously did not fulfil these standards. One thing that I noticed about this juror is that when he decided to change sides he only did this for the sake of giving Henry Fonda a breather. He only did this because he thinks that the men inside the room are being too harsh on the boy and o Henry Fonda. This old man did not have a specific purpose towards the case. It would be acceptable that if he changed sides because he doubted the case but he didn’t. A very common error that I found in this particular juror is that his reason for changing sides is because he pitied on Henry Fonda. He did not at all have a specific reason or he did not change sides for something more related to the case of the accused kid. I personally think that this juror had this kind of thinking mentality because first of all he was an old man. An old man
1. Choose two characters from the Jury. In separate numbers, examine and analyze the two juror's reasoning. a. Check if his reasoning fulfils the standards of thinking. b. Identify some errors in his thinking. c. What do you think led the juror to commit these errors in his thinking with respect to the case he is judging?
Jury # 9
Jury number 9 was the old man seated next to Henry Fonda at the table. These 12 different jurors were seated at a long table to decide the fate of a young man who was allegedly being accused of murdering his own father. These people were randomly chosen to come together and tell which side they choose and to express their views about the case. I personally think that Jury number 9 does not fully fulfil the standards of thinking. Based from the readings the standards of thinking “Whenever we think there is always a purpose, within a point of view, based on assumptions, leading to implications and consequences. We use data, facts, and experiences to make inferences and judgments, based on concepts and theories to answer a question or solve a problem.” Juror number 9 obviously did not fulfil these standards. One thing that I noticed about this juror is that when he decided to change sides he only did this for the sake of giving Henry Fonda a breather. He only did this because he thinks that the men inside the room are being too harsh on the boy and o Henry Fonda. This old man did not have a specific purpose towards the case. It would be acceptable that if he changed sides because he doubted the case but he didn’t. A very common error that I found in this particular juror is that his reason for changing sides is because he pitied on Henry Fonda. He did not at all have a specific reason or he did not change sides for something more related to the case of the accused kid. I personally think that this juror had this kind of thinking mentality because first of all he was an old man. An old man