Critical thinking, a skill that has existed since the creation of man, has been used by most

everyone at one time or another. “Critical thinking is defined as the intellectually disciplined
process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or
evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection,
reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action”(www.criticalthinking.org) Critical
thinking has been applied in all acts of life, but not everyone effectively uses it. Learning how to
effectively use critical thinking can sometimes be difficult. By watching other people use critical
thinking, it is the best way to gain knowledge on this topic. The only thing left to do is to find
someone or something that shows how to effectively use critical thinking in everyday settings.
“Twelve Angry Men”, a movie/play production, is one of the best examples that best
demonstrates this.

Twelve Angry Men demonstrates a very large spectrum of critical thinking. It does this by
effectively using the three stages of critical thinking, analyze, synthesize, and evaluate. It takes
perhaps the perfect situation to use critical thinking and puts it a setting that many people can
relate to or at least recognize. The movie takes place within the confines of a common jury
room. 12 men of all shapes, sizes, and cultural differences have come together to decide the
fate of one individual accused of committing murder. Their job now is to decide on an impartial
verdict; “guilty or not guilty”. To do this they most employ the use of their critical thinking skills.

Initially at the beginning of the movie 11 out of 12 of the men vote not guilty without a
doubt. Juror #8 is not so easily swayed. He begins to ask questions, which is the first step in
critical thinking, analyzing. He continues by questioning each piece of evidence. One particular
piece of evidence he questions is the testimony of the old man.”The old man makes two claims.
First that he hears the boy scream, “I’m going to kill you” right before the body hits the floor.
Second that he “sees” the boy running down the stairs 15 seconds after he hears the body hit
the floor. The things to consider are: that the old man had a limp as a result of a stroke. He had
to walk across a room approximately 12 feet, open a door, and walk down a hallway
approximately 40 feet to see the boy running down the stairs all in 15 seconds. From
examination of evidence and deductive reasoning he synthesizes a logical and probable
conclusion. That it is very unlikely that the old man was able to see the boy running down the
stairs 15 seconds after the body fell. At this point Juror #8 has completed the second step of
critical thinking, synthesis. Finally after making this conclusion he makes an “evaluation” by
determining what he actually believed happened. He recreated the situation of the old man by
approximated the setting and walking around it as an old man with a limp would. He determined
that it would take almost three times as long to make it to the stairs to see the boy. Juror #8 has
completed the final step of critical thinking, evaluation.

Throughout the entire movie these three steps have been used along with one other
aspect of critical thinking; sound reasoning. In order to effectively use critical thinking you must
have sound reasoning. Sound reasoning can be disrupted by logical inconsistencies called
“fallacies”. Throughout the entire movie several of the jurors used a number of these fallacies.
Juror # 10 repeatedly used the allness fallacy. He stated “I’ve lived among them all my life.
They’re born liars.” He makes a generalization, not necessarily true, to the whole of the group.
He has absolutely no evidence to back it up and he has pretty mediocre logic. He again states,
“The kids a punk, he don’t even speak good English! He directly contradicts himself. Being able
to recognize when you use fallacies and then being able to exclude them from your reasoning is
key to having sound reasoning.

By the end of the movie we see the fruits of effective use of critical thinking. He
systematically goes through each of the steps; analyze, synthesize, and evaluation. He does
this all while keeping sound reasoning and strong rhetoric. By the end of the movie he has
convinced most every juror of the opposite they originally believed. By observing his actions we
see an excellent example of how critical thinking should be used. That is why twelve angry men
effectively demonstrates critical thinking.