Step-by-step explanation:
In the movie "12 Angry Men," both individualism and collectivism are present, and they are portrayed through the various characters and their development throughout the film. Let's explore how these qualities are exhibited by different characters and how they change over the course of the movie:
1. Juror #8 (Davis): Juror #8 embodies individualism from the beginning. He is the first to raise doubts about the defendant's guilt and insists on a thorough examination of the evidence. He stands alone initially, challenging the collective opinion and refusing to conform to the majority. His individualistic approach is based on critical thinking, empathy, and a sense of justice.
2. Juror #3 (Lee J. Cobb): Juror #3 initially exhibits strong collectivist tendencies. He strongly adheres to his personal bias and refuses to consider alternative perspectives. He represents the collective force of the majority opinion and is unwilling to deviate from it. However, as the movie progresses, his emotional attachment to the case and personal experiences cause him to question his original stance, displaying elements of individualism.
3. Juror #9 (McCardle): Juror #9 starts off as a rather quiet and reserved character, seemingly inclined towards collectivism. However, as the discussions unfold, he begins to express his own opinions, challenging the groupthink mentality. He demonstrates a transition towards individualism by sharing his insights and observations based on his life experiences.
4. Juror #10 (Ed Begley): Juror #10 exhibits strong collectivist tendencies throughout the movie. He holds deep prejudices and stereotypes, making sweeping generalizations about the defendant's background. His perspective is heavily influenced by societal biases and personal prejudices, representing a narrow-minded collective mindset.
5. Juror #4 (E.G. Marshall): Juror #4 demonstrates a balance between individualism and collectivism. He is analytical and logical, relying on facts and evidence to form his opinions. Initially, he leans towards the collective opinion of guilt but becomes more open to considering alternative possibilities as new evidence is presented. He blends his individual thinking with an objective evaluation of the group's dynamics.
Throughout the movie, there is a gradual shift from collectivism to individualism as more jurors begin to question the initial majority opinion. As discussions progress, characters demonstrate a greater willingness to challenge the collective viewpoint, think independently, and consider the perspectives of others. The movie showcases the power of individual thought, empathy, and critical thinking in overcoming biases and influencing collective decisions.
It is important to note that individualism and collectivism are not portrayed as mutually exclusive or inherently negative or positive in the movie. Instead, they serve as contrasting perspectives that highlight the complexity of human interactions and decision-making processes within a group dynamic.