reasonableperson

A reasonable person is a hypothetical, prudent individual used as a standard for judging conduct in moral, legal, and social contexts. It functions as an objective benchmark for determining what is reasonable in given circumstances, helping to assess actions and decisions independently of any one person’s subjective beliefs.

In law, particularly tort law, the reasonable person standard governs duty of care and negligence. A defendant is expected to act as a reasonable person would under similar facts, considering foreseeability, risk, and the opportunity to avoid harm. The standard is generally objective, but certain characteristics may adjust it: age, physical disability, or professional expertise can elevate or lower the standard. Some jurisdictions refer to the “reasonable person in the actor’s position,” reflecting the actor’s traits and circumstances.

Professional standards apply when the defendant is a professional. In such cases, conduct is evaluated against the standard of care of a reasonably competent practitioner in the field, rather than that of an ordinary layperson. Emergency circumstances, available information, and training can also influence the assessment.

Critics note that the concept can be abstract and culturally contingent, potentially disadvantaging certain groups or failing to capture context. Nonetheless, the reasonable person standard remains a central tool for analyzing responsibility, foreseeability, and due care, and it also appears in ethics and decision theory as a model of prudent judgment.

In everyday language, a reasonable person is someone who acts with sound judgment, restraint, and a balanced consideration of risks and interests.