1. What does the deliberation in 12 Angry Men show us?

It shows that there is more than one way to look at a problem and sometimes things aren't cut and dry, you shouldn't just make an automatic decision without considering everything very carefully

2. How does juror #8, Mr. Davis, use logic and reasoning to argue?

He doesn't just jump to an answer and he doesn't argue based on whether or not he feels the boy needs to be punished. All of his arguments are based completely on the facts and evidence. He presents solid arguments against everything that was said in court, almost proving that nothing that was said was concrete. His logic and reasoning punches holes in every argument thrown at him because he looked at it from a different perspective.

3. How is his argument effective?

It is very effective because it makes you think. It makes you realize that what you've heard may have seemed 100% correct on the surface and that it was easy to believe but after being given alternative situations it doesn't seem positive anymore. He was also very calm and collected the whole time he argued his point, no matter who was yelling at him or calling him names. When you do stuff like that and get really defensive it kills your argument and makes it seem like you are just arguing your side because you have a bias about it or something of that sort.