"Insufficient facts always invite danger," Spock told Captain Kirk as the USS Enterprise lay in state alert after discovering a sleeper cell in space with seventy-two unconscious superhumans inside (Coon, 1967). In a cautious tone, Spock expresses through this quote the need to base theories on logic alone because 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 sufficient evidence necessary to formulate a precise theory. Like Spock, Juror Four emphasizes to his colleagues the need to use enough logic and facts to formulate an accurate conclusion to a confusing situation. In Twelve Angry Men, Juror Four's appeals to logos and ethos illustrate the pragmatic reasoning and impartial judgment that jurors must demonstrate in the legal process. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay Appealing to Logos, Juror Four relies heavily on authoritative sources and inferences that illustrate his pragmatism. Explaining his reasons for his guilty vote, Juror Four said: “I still believe the boy is guilty of murder. I'll tell you why. For me, the most damning evidence was given by the woman across the street who claimed to have actually seen the murder committed” (Rose, 60 years old). Juror four appeals to logos through this statement because he deductively bases his assertion that "the boy is guilty of murder" with an authoritative source and evidence from the witness's testimony. By providing context and legitimate justification for his guilty vote, Juror Four reinforces the idea that his opinion is purely based on pragmatic and plausible inferences. Likewise, Juror Four logically expresses his skepticism of the accused by recalling the facts of the case: “The boy's whole story is flimsy. He pretended he was at the movies. It's a bit ridiculous, isn't it? He didn't even remember the images he had seen” (Rose, 18 years old). Juror Four again uses an appeal to logos in deductively supporting his assertion that the boy's "whole story is flimsy" with an authoritative source of the defendant's testimony stating "he didn't remember images he had seen. The fact that Juror Four relies on this authoritative source to base his skepticism shows the value he places on logic and sensitivity when expressing his opinion. Similarly, after deliberating over new evidence from the trial that he had not previously considered, Juror Four states, “She wore glasses. It's funny. I never thought about it. I am convinced of it” (Rose, 62 years old). Juror four appeals to logos by asserting that he is only "convinced" after deliberating on a previously unconsidered authoritative source. Through this statement, Juror Four communicates that only arguments based on authoritative sources can convince him, showing how rationally and meaningfully he formulates his conclusions. Juror Four's philosophy, particularly his credibility and clear motivations, highlight his desire for objective judgment in the case. Embarrassed by the confrontational atmosphere in the room, Juror Four attempted to instill civility in the room by stating, "I don't see the need to discuss ?.