12 Angry Men

The first example of a illusion is when one of the jurors remarked that the manlike child must be immoralityy because nobody rised unlike . This is fundamentally an argument from ignorance because it makes an assumption based on no exhibitn facts . It argues that guilt is based on the failure to prove otherwise which is wrong from the point of view of logic and the lawThe license instance is when it is argued that one of the witnesses heard the accused scream I ll kill you despite the fact that there was a overhaul roaring by . This is illogical because it would be extremely enceinte to hear from across the tracks when a train is passing byThe triple instance is when one of the jurors claims that you can t trust anything they say when referring to the deposition of the defendant . The bigotry in this statem ent springs from a false belief in relating certain stereo types with a certain infidel group . It is a false belief because of the lack of sufficient prat for much(prenominal) statementThe fourth instance is when one of the jurors claims that when a mortal says I ll kill you he means it . This was proven to be a fallacy when he is able to get the person to scream the same words later on This is a run of a hasty generalization with no rotter at allThe fifth fallacy is when it is shown that the wound was downward nevertheless given the circumstances and the boy s proficiency with a plastic film knife knife , the wound would have to be upward(a) , opposed to what was found in the autopsy . This is another form of fallacy because it immediately assumes without verifying the veracity of the informationThe sixth fallacy is when the indignant juror states that all the evidence can be impel out because there was a woman who cut him pluck the crime .

This is an example of an inconsistent fallacy because a ace witness does not necessarily prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt . There must be other evidence to support the testimonyThe seventh fallacy is when the hazardous juror again argues that the person who saw the crime organism move might not have had her render on . This is basically a red herring fallacy because such promontory is not relevant . A person who necessitate eyeglasses to see would never claim to have seen anything if the glasses were not on the personThe eighth fallacy occurs when the housepainter juror states that power is demand for the case . He states that If you don t have a motive , where s your case . This is an example of a false alternative fallacy because the law has consistently held that motive is not the set up love in a murder case . It may be important but it is not absolutely essentialThe ninth fallacy occurs when the salesman with the baseball tickets states that What s there to talk about ? cardinal of us in here think...If you want to get a plenteous essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay