Abstract
The aim of this article is to answer the question why we do not need "a man" in the legislative definition of a physical person. The author shows that in the Czech legal order we can identify two different possible approaches how to define according to the law what should be understood as a physical person.
The first concept is based on a man to whom belong obligations and rights, while the latter concept is based on the ability to be a bearer of rights and obligations which belong not to a man, but to a physical or juristic person. The author believes that the second construction of a person is based on the pure legal science, which influenced precisely the construction of a person contained in the Civil Code of 1964 - this definition did not need "a man" to define the concept of a person.