Thanks for commenting. When reading the part I quoted, I was put off by the claim itself (which is false except if I overlook or misunderstand something) but also by the style of just claiming something to be “mathematically true” without demonstrating it. To me that just seems like an authority argument. But I will judt assume the rest of the sequence is not like that.
Yeah it’s not like that. Wasn’t meant to be authority, was meant to be ‘this is math and true by definition’ but I see how you got that interpretation.
Thanks for commenting. When reading the part I quoted, I was put off by the claim itself (which is false except if I overlook or misunderstand something) but also by the style of just claiming something to be “mathematically true” without demonstrating it. To me that just seems like an authority argument. But I will judt assume the rest of the sequence is not like that.
Yeah it’s not like that. Wasn’t meant to be authority, was meant to be ‘this is math and true by definition’ but I see how you got that interpretation.
Ok, thanks. Maybe it would be helpful if you defined what you mean by “value”? Maybe you meant (surplus) profit instead of “value”?