This is a thought experiment. Supposing the "buy at the lowest possible price/sell at the highest possible price" expirical premise is changed to the opposite, do we need to change any other premises in praxiology in order to make praxiology still consistent? If so, what (for example, time preference)? If not, can "Human Action" remain valid by just replacing buyer/buy with seller/sell and vice versa?
Did anyone study this kind of thought experiment?
Thanks?
I don't understand the thought experiment.
It follows from the action axiom that humans strive to maximise their psychic income, that is, obtain the highest rank on their value scales. Reversing the statement appears to be an absurdity.
Consider the statement "two property owners agree to an exchange becuase they think they will benefit from it". Can this somehow be flipped around and still make sense?
Irish Liberty Forum
The thought experiment does not correspond to the reality. It is an intellectual exercise. The purpose is to show the praxiology methodology - logical structure of human action (another kind of human).
Thanks!
In order to even contemplate the thought experiment you have to do away with praxeology entirely. You can't just disregard one of the logical deductions from the action axiom without disproving the logical steps used to make the deduction (they're pretty straightforward, but good luck trying) or disproving the action axiom itself (which is impossible because this in itself would be an action). That said, if this "other kind of human" desires to buy high and sell low, then they're placing a high value on receiving as little value as possible when trading. This is contradictory. You can't value not getting value.
Make sense?