One way in which fact finders are supposed to determine the reasonableness of adefendant is via a counterfactual test that personifies the reasonable person. We are toimagine the reasonable person being in the defendant’s circumstances. Then we are todetermine whether the reasonable person would have done as the defendant did. This paperargues that, despite its prevalence, the counterfactual test is a hopeless guide to deter-mining defendant reasonability. In brief, the test is of the wrong sort to give fact finders therequisite guidance. What we are after is not a counterfactual judgment (what the reasonableperson would do) but instead is a question of possibility (what could the reasonable persondo). However, since the only thing impossible of the reasonable person is being unrea-sonable, personifying the reasonable person cannot offer any useful guidance on thisquestion.

EB00000003347K			Available
EB00000003348K			Available

• Against Personifying the Reasonable Person