ALL RISE: DAY 6. Jury Called to Deliberate the First Charge. First Verdict?
Follows Previous session
Jury Deliberations Invited. (Not many have showed up- bad sign! Court Reporter)
This follows the Court sessions on record. The Start of the Trial; Prosecution case: The Opening Day with Sir Alister Hardy; the Witness Reverend TG; and the Defence Witnesses Arthur Koestler, and the Author, a hostile witness.
All rise….
Court in Session
Judge: (to Members of the Jury) You are assembled to deliberate the first charge against the book Involution- Odyssey: namely That you have persuaded the Author to write a deluded hypothesis in order to humiliate her, knowing she would bear the responsibility of your heedless suggestions.
You have heard the evidence both for the Defence and Prosecution and the testimony of the witnesses, including the hostile Author. At this point it is the ‘deluded hypothesis’ that is under deliberation.
What you have to decide is whether the skeletal argument is sufficiently robust to support the book in question.
You are not yet examining the second and third charges, of the book’s lack of discernment in its selection of Author, nor the appropriateness of the timing or language or spurious inducements with regard to possible rewards. Evidence for those charges will follow.
All you are required to concentrate upon is the underpinning scientific hypothesis and whether what you have heard is plausible. You do not have to accept it in a single jump, or even agree with it, but to decide whether it merited a lifelong commitment, and the punitive and hostile reactions it received. If you should acquit the work of ‘delusion’ then the remainder of this case will be simply about ways and means (or rather the lack of ways and means). If you should find the book guilty of a deluded hypothesis then the remainder of the case falls.
I would remind you that in evaluating the opinions of witnesses you have a duty of care in deciding how reliable, unbiased, or motivated those witnesses were. Professor Hardy intended a book of his own when he had gained the time to gather the necessary research; Professor Konrad Lorenz was already engaged in writing a similar work. Arthur Koestler had written much that furnished the Odyssey’s arguments with factual support as well as hypotheses on synchrony and holons. All had reasons to accept or reject the work. You also heard from The Reverend TG (in many ways the most innocent of prejudice) and his reactions. All these will assist you in coming to a verdict.
A visit to the book’s website may assist your deliberations. In the section called The Book, you will find the author’s readings, the endorsements/opinions of others, and excerpts
A few of you have already read the work and will be able to rely on forming your own opinions, and sharing them with others who have not.
Get Comfortable
The Jury Clerk has made refreshments available in the Jury room and you have as long as you need to reach a decision. Please begin by appointing a Foreman and by taking an initial vote so as to be able to evaluate the progress of your discussions. Make yourselves comfortable in the Comment boxes and feel free to offer wide ranging opinions.
All rise