The Reasonable Person: Law's Mirror or Mask?

NB: The volume at the start of this audio is low. Apologies in advance. The provided text critiques the concept of the "reasonable person" within legal and political discourse, arguing that it is often a subjective and biased standard disguised as objectivity. The author uses the United States Supreme Court and Judge Judy as examples to illustrate how this concept is employed to justify pre-existing prejudices rather than uphold impartial justice. Drawing on Iain McGilchrist's distinction between rationality and reasonableness, the article suggests that while pure rationality can be absurd without context, "reasonableness," when applied by legal authorities, often devolves into what the decision-maker personally deems obvious. Ultimately, the text argues that this imagined "reasonable person" serves as a mirror reflecting the speaker's own biases, leading to a form of legal and political theatre that prioritises curated consensus over genuine impartiality.https://philosophics.blog/2025/09/03/the-reasonable-person-from-judge-judy-to-scotus/