THE ERROR IN ROTHBARDS PRAXEOLOGY TO INTRANITIVE PREFERENCES Priceless post. Pre

http://fensel.net/2012/11/16/intransitive-preferences-and-the-money-pump-argument/TYING THE ERROR IN ROTHBARDS PRAXEOLOGY TO INTRANITIVE PREFERENCES

Priceless post.

Preferences are a network – a map, a graph – not a hierarchy or a stack.

Moreover, when preferences are cleared, the network is satisfied, not the node. Even though we only have visibility into the preference exposed by the physical exchange.

This is the fundamental problem with praxeological thought that equates the simplicity of commodities for which the network consists of little more than price, with consumer goods that at least within any price range consist largely of signals. And signals consist in no small part, of contributions both supportive and competitive to norms.

Preferences are not linear, they are sets of values on a graph. And as such, those that appear intransitive are so only because the label that we give to them represents only one item in the (large) set. We make a logical error when we attribute linearity to the label or name, which is only a subset of the values of the set of values that constitute any preference. This confuses the convenience of the label with the inconvenient and often opaque contents of the set.