Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Convincing People -- 12 Angry Men
Angry Men may be the most famous American courtroom drama, though most of it is not even held in a courtroom. Beginning with the end of a trial and the judge's instructions to the jury, it seems that the Defendant is certainly going to the electric chair. Starting with an 11-1 vote for "guilty," the film slowly shows how a single juror named "Davis," who stands up for the Constitutional protection of "reasonable doubt," eventually persuades every other juror to vote "not guilty" along with him.
Which of Mr. Davis' strategies would have been most effective on you?
The strategy that would have been most effective on me as a fellow juror would be his very first strategy: "owing" it to the Defendant to at least discuss the issues and evidence because of the seriousness of the crime and penalty. That is...
It's true that some of the other jurors did not like the idea but they all at least grudgingly went along with it because it was perfectly reasonable, would not be too inconvenient to any of them, and nobody could really come up with a good argument against just talking about the case for a little while.
b. Are there things he could have done differently to be more effective?
The "correct" answer to this question should probably be that Davis could have done things differently; however, after watching him maneuver and adjust and ultimately win every single juror over to "not guilty," there does not seem to be anything that he could have done differently to make himself more effective. He was so effective that he convinced everyone to agree with him. That…
The final point is that others have to do whatever they are doing as all cults try to expand their numbers at the earliest opportunity. (the Cult Influence Tactics) Another method of influence that comes on us is through frames and they are used for both good of the people or evil. The frames are manipulative to put individuals in a situation where they would find it very difficult to
Prejudice The Many Faces of Prejudice If I walk in to a bookstore or browse online I will find hundreds, in fact thousands, of essays, books, articles, and speeches about prejudice. Obviously, most of them are predictably against prejudice. Begin reading any of them at random and chances are good that they will contain the phrases 'don't have prejudice towards people' or 'prejudice is a bad thing,' but what puzzles my mind
Interest groups are generally collections of people that share the same belief that is at the heart of the interest group. For example, people who are concerned about the safety and welfare of animals may join the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) special interest group, while those who are interested in guns may join the National Rifle Association (NRA). The goal of the interest group
For instance, one of those interviewed had a counterfeit Louis Vuitton bag whose value she claimed was £40 (Howie). A real Louis Vuitton bag goes for no less than £1,900. Thus as Howie correctly points out, this particular customer was able to get something that resembled the real thing for a price "almost 50 times less than the price for a similar bag by the designer." It is also
Convincing Others Needs 1-2 pages long. Brave New In all actuality, neither Alan Ehrenhalt nor Barbara Dority are exceedingly convincing in their arguments posed in the "The Misguided Zeal of the Privacy Lobby" and "Halt and Show Your Papers!," respectively. Ehrenhalt's conviction largely banks on widely rambling generalizations, while Dority's essay is littered with too many illogical conclusions or, conclusions which may in fact be logical, but for which the evidence
At this point a strong conflict occurs between their own beliefs. On the one hand they believe that they are doing a good thing. The ethic dimension of their actions derives mainly from the approval that god gives them. On the other hand everything in the new land is against them. Therefore they reach the conclusion that god is not with them and they do not have his approval. Only