Forensic implications of the difficulties of defining delusions

Delusions are evasive to define: (1) Within the process of defining, one uses part of the final conclusion, which should derive from the basic definition (in other words, Circular reasoning); (2) Many, if not most, of so-called normal persons, hold delusion-like ideas; (3) Delusion becomes, usually, more understandable and less bizarre when investigated; (4) Delusions are not unique by remaining resistible to reason; (5) For every delusional content, as bizarre and remote as it may be, there is at least one cultural niche, in which the same content is considered legitimate and reasonable, (if no important and dignified). The forensic implications of these difficulties (to define delusions), will be discussed and elaborated.