Red Herring Logical Fallacy In 12 Angry Men

353 Words2 Pages
Twelve Angry Men: Revised Logical Fallacy Essay Assignment

During the discussion between the jurors, Juror #10 had made a red herring logical fallacy. In the book, the jurors talked about the boy’s unfortunate situation; they believed that they owed the boy something. In response to the jurors, Juror #10 stated, “We don’t owe him a thing. He got a fair trial, didn’t he? What d’you think that trial cost?” (13). This quote is clearly a red herring logical fallacy because Juror #10 drew the attention away from the issue. By definition, a red herring logical fallacy is when somebody tries to change the subject. Juror #10 does this by bringing up how much the trial costs, which distracted from the main idea because the cost of the trial had nothing