Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Prejudice is a biased feeling that did not depend on the reason or genuine encounter. At the point when an individual concludes that they dislike somebody dependent on their skin color, religion, nationality, or different reasons that the individual has no influence over, they are one-sided and have partiality towards that individual.
In the play “12 Angry Men” by Reginald Rose there are a few very racist Jurors especially Juror 3 said a few things that highlight his racist way of thinking. Right at the beginning of the play on page 9, he says: “I mean let’s be reasonable. You sat in court and heard the same things we did: The man’s a dangerous killer. You could see it.” The problem here is that Juror 3 is not being reasonable. The accused is a black teenager, who lives in a poor neighborhood so Juror 3 could be referring to the way the accused looks when he said “You could see it.” However, no one can see if a person killed someone or did something good or bad by looking at them.
Another type of prejudice that is highlighted in the play is socioeconomic prejudice. In the play there isn’t one particular Juror that represents socioeconomic prejudice, there are a few that think that the accused is guilty because of the neighborhood in which he lives. When Juror 4 said: “He was born in a slum. Slums are breeding grounds for criminals.” When he says that the is biased. He is not stating facts but just what he thinks may be true. Only because a person lives in a slum doesn’t mean that he’s a criminal. Just like Juror 4, Juror 10 blames the crime and the boy because he’s poor: “Listen, I’ve lived among ‘em all my life. You can’t believe a word they say. I mean, they’re born liars.”
The problem is that people can often not control how wealthy they are.
Juror 4 (E.G. Marshall) He is a very wealthy person who makes sure that he sticks to his facts. He is a rational person.
Based on the big five models the following can be attributed to juror 4.
Juror #4
- Wealthy
- presents himself well all the time
- serious
- only wants facts
- high conscientiousness and neuroticism.
The film indicated an incredible case of gathering things toward the finish of the motion picture. The meaning of mindless conformity takes a stab at consistency inside a gathering, even at the expense of one’s convictions and feelings. Clearly, if that one member of the jury would have not defended what he accepted the film and the decision would have had a totally diverse result. In any case, he held his ground, and in light of that, they were all ready to wake up. The most intriguing thing about this film to me was viewing the entire procedure go down, tuning in to thought, and having the option to get everybody’s thoughts were fascinating supposing that it wasn’t for the one man, everything and everybody’s sentiments would be totally extraordinary like they were to start with.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.