The Similarities of a literary Essayist and a Jury
Name:
Institution:
The Similarities of a literary essayist and a Jury
The comparison between literal essayists and the jury in a court of law is well profound based on different aspects of both spectrums. The methods of execution of their work exhibit high levels of similarities. These similarities range from the use of logic among the essayists and the jury alike, use of factual information that is easy to validate. Further, Essayists use information created by previous by other essayists work as a reference while jurors use post-trial case reports to determine a sentence. Additionally, both the essayist and a jury is to criticize, elaborate, and to fault the negative side of different subject matters as well as society. Consequently, this paper seeks to discuss the similarities between jurors and literary essay writers based on the nature of the work and professional requirements of each.
The decisions of the jury are extensively supported by a substantially logical argument based on strict legal guidelines. These guidelines are usually rational and have absolute clarity on the most appropriate course of action in the determination of any particular case. Similarly, literal essay writers formulate their arguments based on a strict set of writing rules. The arguments employ logic to make sense and relevance of any topic that the essayists focus. Logic can be defined as the reasoning that is rational and validated and is guided by a set of strict principles. Historically, logic originates from a Greek word ‘Logos’ which translates to sound ideas, motivation, inclined towards mathematical exactness. The use of logic also guarantees a high standard in both settings as they dictate the use of critical analysis before putting forward an idea or making a sentence on a criminal case in a court of law. Logic ensures utmost fairness in a criminal case. In comparison, literal essay writing, it provides factual and sensible ideologies that relevant to the topic in question hence the similarity between literal essayist and jury.
Secondly, acquiring factual information is derived from reliable sources such as research papers, publications, journals, textbooks, as well as verified reports based on historical occurrences or events. The professional code for both literal essayists and the jury requires that any idea put forward that is validated must have a reference. As a result, both ends of the bar are dedicated to referring back to recent or old reports to help in formulating a course of action. For example, the jury uses post-trial reports to draw reference for ongoing criminal cases. The reports possess varying levels of accuracy such that jury’s analytics could prefer to use a full jury’s report as opposed to a jurors case report.
Similarly, the literal essay writers use reference according to the level of accuracy required, which is found in publications, government websites, research reports, and formal records. Additionally, both parties must always include details about the accuracy of the source of the information and state whether it affected their decision and how it affected the outcome indeed. However, inaccurate information source could create a negative impression of the writer or the juror. Thus they often seek credible sources, unless it is not available.
Moreover, at the beginning of any case in a court of law, the jury only posses a tentative opinion. However, as precise information detail is availed from investigations, the juror’s view changes and becomes more stable. Predictably, the jury builds a case based on an explanation of events occurring before the criminal act, which requires critical evaluation to help in constructing evidence for prosecution and decision making. Similarly, literal essayists employ the same decision making procedure. The main tactic tics involved include observation, intensive research and evaluation of the facts in relation to the selected subject topic. After a thorough assessment of all relevant information, the essayist combines the data. Validating information by searching for information from credible references ensures credibility to the consumer (xxxx).
Additionally, both literal essay writers and the jury must choose a non-partisan motive to minimize the possibility of unfair judgment sentence or inaccurate literal information. Further, the primary role of and Literal essay writer is to critique a subject matter or work. Likewise, a jury’s work is meant to correct bad behaviours in society. Hence they must adhere to necessary rules. This makes both parties subject to regulations of carrying out different tasks under a different set of rules. Still, the fundamental guiding principle is the same, which is the set of strict guidelines.
Overall, using pertinent information or common sense, factual information and historical information sources constitute the most outstanding similarities. The validity of the information provided is a significant determinant of the outcome and therefore, crucial throughout the process. The collection and validation processes are tedious, thus the need for personal dedication, patience and most importantly, paying attention to detail. Therefore, both the literal essay writers and the jury require not only possessing high levels of intellect but also self-discipline to complete all the relevant tasks with credibility.