"Insufficient facts always invite danger," Spock declared to Captain Kirk while the USS Enterprise was on high alert after discovering a sleeper cell in the space with seventy-two unconscious superhumans inside (Coon, 1967). With his cautionary tone, Spock expressed through this quote the need to base theories on logic alone as deficient facts "invite danger." In Star Trek: Space Seed, Spock encounters a mysterious sleeper cell in space filled with unconscious superhumans dating back centuries, leading him to inspect enough evidence needed to formulate an accurate theory. Like Spock, Juror Four emphasizes to his colleagues the need to use logic and sufficient facts to formulate an accurate conclusion to a puzzling situation. In Twelve Angry Men, the fourth juror's appeals to logos and ethos illustrate the pragmatic reasoning and impartial judgment that jurors must display in the judicial process. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Exhibiting an appeal to logos, Juror Four relies heavily on authoritative sources and inferences that illustrate his pragmatism. Explaining the rationale behind his guilty vote, Juror Four says, "I still believe the boy is guilty of murder. I'll tell you why. To me, the most damning evidence was provided by the woman across the street who claimed to have actually seen the murder committed" (Rose, 60). Juror Four appeals to Logos through this statement because he deductively supports his claim that "the boy is guilty of murder" with an authoritative source and evidence from witness testimony. By providing the context and legitimate justification behind his guilty vote, Juror Four reinforces the idea that his opinion is purely based on pragmatic inferences and plausibility. Similarly, Juror Four logically expresses his skepticism toward the defendant by recalling the facts of the case: “The whole guy has The story is flimsy. He claimed he was at the movies. It's a little ridiculous, isn't it ? He couldn't even remember what photos he saw" (Rose, 18). Juror Four once again uses an appeal to logos deductively supporting his claim that the boy's "entire story is inconsistent" with an authoritative source from the defendant's testimony stating that he "could not remember what images he had seen." . Juror Four's reliance on this authoritative source as the basis for his skepticism demonstrates the value he places on logic and sensitivity when expressing his opinion. Similarly, after deliberating on new trial evidence that he had not previously considered, Juror Four states, "He wore glasses. Funny. I never thought of that. I'm convinced" (Rose, 62). Juror four appeals to logos, claiming to be "convinced" only after deliberating on an authoritative source not previously considered. Through this statement, juror four communicates that only arguments based on authoritative sources can convince him, demonstrating how rationally and sensibly he formulates his conclusions. Juror Four's ethics, particularly his credibility and clear motivations, show his desire for an objective judgment in the case. Annoyed by the contentious atmosphere in the room, Juror Four attempts to instill civility in the room by stating, "I don't see any need to argue like this. I think we should be able to behave like gentlemen" (Rose, 16). Through this statement,?".