Reaction paper

Theme: Justice, Truth, Law

As a brief summary, on this film, there is this young man who is under prosecution for his offense of
allegedly murdering his father, He was on the brink of the corner of being held accountable for his
offense due to the strong evidence that were up against him. It turns out that the judge, put the faith of
this young man to the 12 individuals who would decide if this young man is guilty or not, and as it turns
out, with their deliberation, it resulted that this young man is not found guilty due to the lack of
reasonableness of evidence and testimony that was up against him.

The movie 12 angry men, is a depiction of how the art debating could come up with a consensus that
could change the life of a person. Realistically, most of the people are shying away with the idea of
arguing because for some reason, we don’t want to cause some trouble or commotion, we are afraid
that through arguing, we might hurt someone’s feeling and belief. From the moment that we were born
we were taught and conditioned to avoid confrontation, we have been taught to comply, to remain
silent, to be careful of what we speak, we have been taught of not let our emotions show, we are bound
by all this belief from the very moment we were born that gives us fear not to express ourselves and
disables us. But for this movie, it shows us the relevance of how the art debating and argument could be
a useful tool in seeking justice, and finding the truth. This movie gives us idea of what the art of
argument could do in order to change someone’s faith. It gives me an eye opener that arguing wasn’t
really that bad at all, if done in a proper setting. From this movie, the prominent way of Knowing was
with Reasoning, which is our ability to form conclusions and judgments. they argue to tap each other’s
idea, by questioning the facts, by weighing the evidence and by being critical on the assertiveness of the
witness testimony, though as expected there are some moments where due to clash of belief and idea,
they tend to get annoyed towards each other, there is even that one moment in the film where the guy
nearly punched the other guy after contradicting his statement, but despite all of these in the end they
come up with one decision. This movie gives me lesson that by arguing, we don’t just throw some
random words, instead we learn how to get free of ourselves by expressing our thought, by unlocking
the limitations and fear that we had, we began to appreciate how arguing could change our faith.

This movie also gives us the proper perspective of what are the qualities that we must possessed as
human being, in order for us to come up with a reasonable decision, which is very important in serving
justice and seeking for the truth.

As individual who have a different background and culture, we were raised by different teaching
method and values, we grow up having that nature of being biased when coming up with a decision, we
are prone to these biases, that we tend to decide situation in accordance with our own perspective of
what is right even though the other parties may have the right point. This is very crucial, because if we are
going to put ourselves in the position of a certain judge, who has the power to decide someones faith,
having those biases, may lead to an unsound judgment. Having the intuation of judging what is wrong or
not wasn’t enough if we want to come up with a reasonable judgement, In the process of jurying someone,
what is needed the most is absolute neutrality because more than often, prejudice will most likely obscure
the truth.
 The characters in the movie has these 12 men who had different kind of character and background, it’s
very important to take note of this, because as what we have seen in this movie, initially majority of
them shown some biases when it comes in deciding a situation, but despite that, in the end they end up
having one decision as a result of proper deliberation.

Of all those 12 men who were tasked in finding the guilt of the accused, there is this particular
charismatic quite man who I appreciate a lot, because of the qualities that he had of having independent
mindset of not automatically putting sentence to the said accused, despite the fact that on the initial
voting 11 out of 12 have initially casted their vote of believing that the accused is guilty for his offense,
he stood up alone and remain firm with his decision of not instantly deciding the outcome of said case, as
turned out he convince his other peers to talk along with the case and digest the facts base on its reliability
and evidence. I find it inspiring, because he did not let the pressure undermine his judgment of thinking
of what is right to do, he even resorted with the idea of having deliberation as a proper way of deciding
the case, and not just by mere instinct and belief on the testimony of the witnesses.

In our world today, especially in the arena of legal profession, where life of an individual is at stake,
where justice and truth are being on the line, we need this kind of mentality, that kind of thinking of
being skeptic and independent of not having biased with our decision.

The movie also gives us the idea that facts of a case, could either vary or bend even though it was
given by a certain witness. As what have been depict in the film, there are a lot of loopholes coming from
the testimony of the witnesses, that lead for some individuals to question its’s reliability. This gives us the
impression that human being are prone to lies and biases that we need to be skeptic of believing instantly
of what other people said. We need to be critical of finding the proximity of a given testimony to the
actual facts that have happened. In the end the 12 men agree to used deductive reasoning as their resort
of knowing the facts, there are even some parts in the movie where they are trying to simulate the
situation to ascertain whether what has been said by the witness is true or not. This can be proof that no
one will ever know if the evidence is appropriate to use, one must account every single possibility, which
can be troublesome as this can only be done if you are omniscient.

Another important consideration also that this movie taught us, was that we should not let our
personal emotion to take over our judgment in deciding a case. The judgments of some jurors are
swayed by the fact that their emotions are getting the better of them, for better or for worse.
There was this guy in the movie who was part among the 12 men, who always get angry every
time other character convinced that the boy was not guilty. Throughout the movie, this character
has been seen to be very against the possibility of the innocence of the defendant. As what we
have learned through this, having our emotion to get over us, leads us to be biased in some
situation, that’s why as much as we can, we need to disregard our personal experience and
emotion when it comes to decision.

Overall the movie is great, I could come up with a conclusion that in serving justice and
finding the truth, it isn’t just enough to believe instantly of what other witness has been told, we
should undertake a certain process, throw off some argument if necessary, debate if needed, be
skeptic as much as it could, because coming up with a decision especially if what at stake is
someone’s life is very crucial matter that requires due process.