The law of diminishing marginal utility as law of mental order-ness

Nozick (1977) formulated a challenge to Austrians related to the application of the Law of diminishing marginal utility in the context of notion of indifference. To be able to claim that the value or attributed utility of the subsequent units of goods decreases, we must compare comparables, even if deliberate choice means that we have chosen a particular as being value-different. This causes a logical paradox. One cannot be indifferent and demonstrate a particular preference at the same time. It is mutually exclusive.The paper discusses a critique of Wysocki (2021), who proposes a solution to the paradox in terms of a counterfactual perception of the Law. The critique points to the essence of why neo-Misesians cannot resolve the paradox, which lies in the interpretation of the origin of valuation within the particular value scale.The paper offers an alternative solution based on Hayek’s concept of mental order-ness with the implication of the general applicability of the Law to any order in reality.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophical Problems in Science (Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce)
Published
2024-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.59203/zfn.76.601
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Economic Theory and Institutions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.26
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The law of diminishing marginal utility as law of mental order-ness

Matúš Pošvanc
2 citations
Philosophical Problems in Science (Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce)
Economic Theory and Institutions
2.26
article

The law of diminishing marginal utility as law of mental order-ness

Matúš Pošvanc
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Nozick (1977) formulated a challenge to Austrians related to the application of the Law of diminishing marginal utility in the context of notion of indifference. To be able to claim that the value or attributed utility of the subsequent units of goods decreases, we must compare comparables, even if deliberate choice means that we have chosen a particular as being value-different. This causes a logical paradox. One cannot be indifferent and demonstrate a particular preference at the same time. It is mutually exclusive.The paper discusses a critique of Wysocki (2021), who proposes a solution to the paradox in terms of a counterfactual perception of the Law. The critique points to the essence of why neo-Misesians cannot resolve the paradox, which lies in the interpretation of the origin of valuation within the particular value scale.The paper offers an alternative solution based on Hayek’s concept of mental order-ness with the implication of the general applicability of the Law to any order in reality.

Philosophical Problems in Science (Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce)(76)
F. A. Hayek Foundation (SK)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Economic Theory and Institutions
2.26
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.