Twelve people who were angry with strangers

Regarding the debate, the Chinese are familiar with too much. Su Qin Zhang Yi united the alliance with one mouth to determine the world to divide and unite, Lin Xiangru argued with Shibi, and when Zhu Yuanzhang arrived, he still regretted not getting the jade seal made by Heshibi. Confucius commented on Guan Zhong, in fact, it was also a debate, and Xing Qi did not allow the barbarians to destroy the orthodoxy. Tang Xuanzong specially wrote an article to reconcile the unification situation of the Eight Kingdoms that Sima Yan should dispose of the prince at no cost. It was also a debate, and wanted to convince his own brother-killing to force his father to be justified. Cheng Zu didn't say anything, but Fang Xiaoru couldn't argue with him. He was born into a record of Jushi Clan. Those who are capable are eloquent, and those who are sly.

In terms of inference, Holmes and Keigo Higashino can beat this plot inference by one tenth.
However, the debater, the inference, are not for themselves, wonderful.

A detail from the beginning to the end of the movie: the system, it is the system that gives them rights, and it is they who create and continuously improve the system. The father who insisted on being guilty to the end was rude, irrational, passionate, extremely impulsive, completely opposed to the first skeptical man, elegant, sensible, tolerant, loving, and careful. But they were selected at the same time. This is the randomness of the system's choice. The reason why people can succeed in nature to this point depends on our own diversity. Therefore, these twelve jurors have different behaviors and colors, some are bold and green men; some look like cowardly clerks; some are extremely calm men who can't sweat out on a sultry day; and some have a loud voice with extreme prejudice. Old man: There are old people with rich experience, and there are young people who are easy to change attitudes. They come from different backgrounds and grow up, but they are now given the same rights and sentenced to life and death.

This right is extremely difficult and stressful, because it is possible to ruin a life for this, or release a murderer, all because of one's own vote. This right is also extremely simple and easy, because it is trying to judge another person, a suspect who has never known him. If he is judged right, he will not get any reward, and if he is wrong, he will not lose a small amount. Therefore, different personal perspectives give birth to different ideas and persistence in ideas. People, individual individuals are fragile; but they are very effective when gathered together, and the power of a group depends on the overall consciousness of the group. And this overall consciousness is either a leader with a high IQ, or a high level of everyone's overall IQ, otherwise it is a mess, and the more people there are, the more chaotic it will be useless. When there is a dispute, if everyone contributes a little suspicion or a little inference, of course it is stronger than an individual and can lead the group closer to the truth. But everyone is independent and at the same time affected, contradictory and complicated, and all have their own prejudices and perspectives. When no one can persuade anyone, the root cause is that the oil and salt can't get in, and can't listen to it.

At this time, the system is on the scene, and the system requires everyone to discuss unity. I want to express my views, and you must listen. If you are unhappy, you can refute and lose your temper, but after losing your temper, I still have to express my views to make you unhappy. Either you persuade me, or I persuade you. The goal of this kind of debate, this kind of argument, is to get close to the truth. So is persuasion the truth? What if 12 people agree that the result is wrong? When such a conclusion cannot be avoided, the compromise of "reasonable doubt" is really a genius. If the U.S. judicial system is good and precious, that's about it.

When I was in high school, I was addicted to online games. Once I was caught by my teacher after going through the fence on the net, and I was locked in the office waiting for my parents. In terms of psychological experience, understanding the suspect to a slight degree, the kind of person being kept in the interrogation room waiting for the outcome of the trial. If he is really innocent, wait for 12 jurors to give him an innocence and give him freedom. So the opinions and debates of 12 people, for him, the last straw of life, really can't be ignored.

The heroes we sing also come from all corners of the world, robbing the rich and helping the poor, and the great heroes serve the country for the people. But the people are outside, for the people, for that people, for whom? How do we care about others? We ourselves are others. Therefore, when we stand here and are given the right to judge others, try to change ourselves. Speaking of which, they are all very easy, simple and easy to understand, but only those who truly understand deeply, care about others, and persist like the first skeptical person are qualified citizens. This is of course a great movie.

We come from all corners of the world, shall we stand for justice together? no, let's hold justice together.
It is better to forget each other than to forget each other. If you leave the old man with a gentle talk, and greet each other, it is great harmony. 12 people who are angry for strangers? Are you angry for strangers? Of course not, it's for justice and for myself.

View more about 12 Angry Men reviews