Ethics In Twelve Angry Men

throughout the play Twelve Angry Men, strong personalities and stubbornness make it difficult to decide whether it is reasonable to agree that the boy on trial should be charged with murder. Juror #8 stayed true to his belief that ethics must be used during the trial while the other men are judgmental of the ideas that he presents. Many of the other men chose to approach the discussion holding true to their morals and previous judgements to use as validation that the boy was guilty. Arguments arose due to different ideas of what occurred on the night the father was murdered. It was difficult for the jurors to deliberate as they all had different morals and ethics. Because all beliefs should be understood, individual morality and social ethics conflict with each other when put head-to-head.

At the beginning, each juror had their own perspective and personal backgrounds that helped provide different outlooks on the case. All the jurors had strong opinions based on their beliefs and their bias caused for different ideas about what truly happened to be spread. The majority of the jurors are selfish and want to leave, but this is understandable as “the male orientation predisposes men toward interest in individual achievement” (Colby, Damon 474). They have the mindset that what happens to the boy will not affect their future due to the fact that they have nothing to do with him and ultimately they would rather be anywhere else. Additionally, “[personal identities] are likely to be grounded upon their occupational choices,” which is shown when those that are affluent feel entitled and have no sympathy for the boy on trial (Colby, Damon 474). Juror #5 was extremely understanding of the boy’s upbringing as he lived a similar life growing up, further proving how backgrounds influence personal morals and