I find it interesting the relativistic nature of (2) in Menger’s breakdown of mistaken goods. Especially when religion is considered a “relationship good”. Has this been a point of contention at any point in time where legal definitions of goods were contested on the basis of a “interpreted human need”?
I find it interesting the relativistic nature of (2) in Menger’s breakdown of mistaken goods. Especially when religion is considered a “relationship good”. Has this been a point of contention at any point in time where legal definitions of goods were contested on the basis of a “interpreted human need”?