[pp.int.general] purpose of manifesto

[Carlos Ayala Vargas]

Reinier Bakels wrote:
> The answer is short. Yes, "natural law" is (commonly seen as) a 
> questionable concept, and you just re-invented the reasons.
More than questionable, rejectable. Unless anyone proves the /natural/ 
origin of author's rights -what I find impossible-.
> Yet there is a need to name "non-utilitarian rights".
If you are looking for such name, I think you should remove /natural 
rights/ from the list, unless anyone proves what I said above.
> Not everything is economics. The "auithors right" concept in its 
> purest form implies that the author decides, "because he is entitled to"
Entitled to, of course: by laws approved (and changeable) by human 
beings. Not by nature, that's what I said.