The 'reasonable person' standard represents a fundamental concept in common law, yet tracing its precise historical development has presented signific...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
The 'reasonable person' standard represents a fundamental concept in common law, yet tracing its precise historical development has presented significant challenges for legal scholars. While systematic documentation remains incomplete, various legal traditions offer compelling evidence of early applications. Roman jurisprudence included analogous standards of care that would later influence European legal systems. During the medieval period, English courts occasionally employed reasoning that resembled reasonable person analysis when resolving liability disputes. By the 1700s, American colonial courts had begun incorporating comparable approaches into their negligence determinations. The 1837 British case Vaughan v. Menlove is frequently referenced as a foundational moment, though legal historians note that similar principles had emerged across multiple jurisdictions well before this landmark decision. Each legal tradition's scholars maintain that their historical records demonstrate the earliest formal application of this standard. However, the absence of clear documentary connections between these various precedents makes it impossible to establish a definitive chronological sequence. This historical complexity suggests that ______
Which choice most logically completes the text?
the reasonable person standard definitely originated in Roman law.
Vaughan v. Menlove established an entirely new legal principle.
the precise origin of the reasonable person standard cannot be conclusively determined.
American colonial courts created the first version of this standard.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| The 'reasonable person' standard represents a fundamental concept in common law, yet tracing its precise historical development has presented significant challenges for legal scholars. |
|
| While systematic documentation remains incomplete, various legal traditions offer compelling evidence of early applications. |
|
| Roman jurisprudence included analogous standards of care that would later influence European legal systems. |
|
| During the medieval period, English courts occasionally employed reasoning that resembled reasonable person analysis when resolving liability disputes. |
|
| By the 1700s, American colonial courts had begun incorporating comparable approaches into their negligence determinations. |
|
| The 1837 British case Vaughan v. Menlove is frequently referenced as a foundational moment, though legal historians note that similar principles had emerged across multiple jurisdictions well before this landmark decision. |
|
| Each legal tradition's scholars maintain that their historical records demonstrate the earliest formal application of this standard. |
|
| However, the absence of clear documentary connections between these various precedents makes it impossible to establish a definitive chronological sequence. |
|
Main Point: The reasonable person standard has evidence of early applications across multiple legal traditions, but the lack of clear documentary connections makes it impossible to determine its precise historical origin.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The passage shows that multiple legal traditions have evidence of early reasonable person standards, but there's a crucial problem: no clear documentary connections exist between these precedents
- This means we have competing claims about who was first, but no way to definitively settle the question
- The right answer should acknowledge that despite all this evidence from different sources, the lack of clear connections means we cannot definitively determine where or when the standard truly originated
the reasonable person standard definitely originated in Roman law.
✗ Incorrect
- Claims the standard 'definitely originated in Roman law'
- Contradicts the passage's central point that no definitive origin can be established
Vaughan v. Menlove established an entirely new legal principle.
✗ Incorrect
- States that Vaughan v. Menlove 'established an entirely new legal principle'
- Directly contradicts the passage, which explicitly says 'similar principles had emerged across multiple jurisdictions well before this landmark decision'
the precise origin of the reasonable person standard cannot be conclusively determined.
✓ Correct
- States that 'the precise origin of the reasonable person standard cannot be conclusively determined'
- Perfectly matches the passage's conclusion that the 'absence of clear documentary connections makes it impossible to establish a definitive chronological sequence'
American colonial courts created the first version of this standard.
✗ Incorrect
- Claims 'American colonial courts created the first version of this standard'
- Contradicts the passage's point that multiple traditions have evidence and each claims to be first