>Chai-on:
>
>Sure. If they are equal in all respects, we have to use 'identity' sign
>that has three lines of -.
>Equation signifies an equality just in one respect only.
>
>"A pair of shoes = 10 us dollars" signifies that they are equal only in
>values
>Why is this at issue by the way?
The proximate reason that this is at issue is Alan's post 460, in which he
suggested
>This is, moreover, not a weak algebraic relation but a very strong one,
because >the price relation is not only transitive, symmetric and
reflexive, but *linear*, >that is, additive. Gil constantly forgets or
hides this.
Since I didn't think that I'd "forgotten" or "hid" anything of relevance,
and in particular didn't think that positing reflexivity, symmetry,
transitivity, (and even) linearity was sufficient to get around the problem
with Marx's argument, I wrote back to that effect, and we've gone on from
there. Gil