Outline how the "reasonable person" concept can be interpreted in different ways. How can it lead to one interpreting this concept normatively?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

We expect people will act in ways that would be normal or average. A "reasonable" person does what we could expect the ordinary, average person to do. But, the average person doesn't always read, or understand, warning labels or terms of service. The average person standard when applied to consumers might exempt too many consumers from responsibility for their own acts. Especially when applied to producers, the average person standard sets the bar too low. We can expect more from a person who designs, manufacturers, and sells a product than average, especially if the product is intended to an adolescent or teen consumer.
These factors lead many to interpret the reasonable person standard as a standard of thoughtful, reflective, and judicious decision making. The problem with this, of course, is that we might be asking more of average consumers than they are capable of giving. Particularly if we think that vulnerable consumers deserve greater protection from harm, we might conclude that this sense of reasonable is too stringent a standard to be applied to consumer behavior. On the other hand, given the fact that producers do have more expertise than the average person, this stronger standard seems more appropriate when applied to producers than to consumers.