The present work pursues to establish the correlation existing between the notions of common sense and experiential knowledge. The starting point is the definition of common sense made by Clifford Geertz (1999) as well as the definition of experiential knowledge by Coloma and Agüero (2014). This paper argues that it is not possible to assimilate common sense and experiential knowledge, because that would lead to consider —when assessing the evidence— legally inadmissible prejudices and cultural biases. The conclusion sustains that experiential knowledge are reasonings that the judge builds by refining the social knowledge contained in common sense to endow it with coherence with the requirements of law.