No matter what time or place, human interaction has been a prominent part of the human experience due to the knowledge people can gain from relating and interacting with others. In the novel To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, the narrator, Scout, experiences human interaction through her daily lectures from her father, Atticus, and through her conversations with her neighbors, that enriches her childhood Similarly, in Twelve Angry Men. A Book Of Plays, a play written by Reginald rose, the jurors clearly exhibit human interaction in the way that they deliberate over the case presented to them, struggling to decide whether their suspect is guilty or not. On the highlight of human relation, the statement Universal Declaration of Human Rights
…show more content…
People interact and relate to each other through the amount of tolerance they choose to have about someone’s beliefs; whether the ideas may differ or are similar to their own, people either choose to accept, reject or conform to the popular opinion. One way people choose to interact with each other is by being open to different ideas in order to relate to others no matter what their belief. In the novel To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Atticus makes a statement on how to view things from another's perspective to Scout by explaining, “ You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point view” (39) By using this metaphor for Scout, Atticus is trying to explain to Scout that she needs to view things in other people’s perspectives before passing judgment on them. Being often used as a metaphor for the interaction of acceptance, it demonstrates how …show more content…
In the play Twelve Angry Men. A Book Of Plays the revealment of new undeniable evidence that Juror 8 brings seems upset Juror 3 in which 3 responds by yelling, “ I've seen all kinds of dishonesty in my day, but this little display takes the cake...you're not getting through to me, I've had enough.” (Rose 20) By interacting in a disrespectful manner, Juror 3 is blinding himself to others’ beliefs even when clear evidence is presented because he is trying his hardest to block off his ability to relate to the other jurors because he truly believes in only himself. Due to his inability to relate and interact well with other jurors, therefore it causes Juror 3 to create unwanted tension between the group just for the sake of being right in his own eyes. To further emphasize this point, Allen clarifies in his editorial “American Flag Stands For Tolerance” how the burning the flag is ironic: “The ultimate irony would have been to punish views expressed by burning the flag that stands for the right to those expressions.” (3) Allen is revealing the irony in believing that burning the flag is an endangerment for the what the flag stands for. Seeing that the flag stands for the freedom to express oneself, the burning of the flag is a form of expression people are using to display their
People interact and relate to each other through the amount of tolerance they choose to have about someone’s beliefs; whether the ideas may differ or are similar to their own, people either choose to accept, reject or conform to the popular opinion. One way people choose to interact with each other is by being open to different ideas in order to relate to others no matter what their belief. In the novel To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Atticus makes a statement on how to view things from another's perspective to Scout by explaining, “ You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point view” (39) By using this metaphor for Scout, Atticus is trying to explain to Scout that she needs to view things in other people’s perspectives before passing judgment on them. Being often used as a metaphor for the interaction of acceptance, it demonstrates how …show more content…
In the play Twelve Angry Men. A Book Of Plays the revealment of new undeniable evidence that Juror 8 brings seems upset Juror 3 in which 3 responds by yelling, “ I've seen all kinds of dishonesty in my day, but this little display takes the cake...you're not getting through to me, I've had enough.” (Rose 20) By interacting in a disrespectful manner, Juror 3 is blinding himself to others’ beliefs even when clear evidence is presented because he is trying his hardest to block off his ability to relate to the other jurors because he truly believes in only himself. Due to his inability to relate and interact well with other jurors, therefore it causes Juror 3 to create unwanted tension between the group just for the sake of being right in his own eyes. To further emphasize this point, Allen clarifies in his editorial “American Flag Stands For Tolerance” how the burning the flag is ironic: “The ultimate irony would have been to punish views expressed by burning the flag that stands for the right to those expressions.” (3) Allen is revealing the irony in believing that burning the flag is an endangerment for the what the flag stands for. Seeing that the flag stands for the freedom to express oneself, the burning of the flag is a form of expression people are using to display their