<p>I'm taking an introductory microeconomics course and have been introduced to the 3 axioms of economic preferences. These include</p>

<ul>
<li>Completeness</li>
<li>Transitivity</li>
<li>Non-satiation</li>
</ul>

<p>My understanding of <strong>non-satiation</strong> is incomplete. This is because of how the lecturer has described it. I am told that non-satiation means</p>

<ol>
<li>More is better</li>
<li>Indifference curves further from the origin are better</li>
</ol>

<p>From some research on the internet I find that non-satiation is also known as the Axiom of Dominance, described as:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>If any combination A has more of one or of both the goods than B, then
  it is said A dominates B. This axiom states that if A dominates B,
  then the consumer will prefer A to B. This axiom is also known as the
  axiom of non-satiation or of monotonicity.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Given this, my understanding is that given 2 bundles <span class="math-container">$A(x,y)$</span> and <span class="math-container">$B(a,b)$</span>, <span class="math-container">$A &gt; B$</span> if <span class="math-container">$x &gt; a$</span> <em>and</em> <span class="math-container">$y &gt; b$</span>.</p>

<p>My questions:</p>

<ul>
<li>Q1) Is my understanding correct?</li>
<li>Q2) What if <span class="math-container">$x&lt;a$</span> but <span class="math-container">$y&gt;b$</span>? Is the agent indifferent? He will have to be, otherwise completeness will be violated?</li>
</ul>

<p>Thanks for your help.</p>

<microeconomics><preferences>
Axiom: More is Better; But when is more better?
Gustavo Louis G. Montańo
# Axiom: More is Better; But when is more better?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-02-17)

I'm taking an introductory microeconomics course and have been introduced to the 3 axioms of economic preferences. These include

* Completeness
* Transitivity
* Non-satiation

My understanding of **non-satiation** is incomplete. This is because of how the lecturer has described it. I am told that non-satiation means

1. More is better
2. Indifference curves further from the origin are better

From some research on the internet I find that non-satiation is also known as the Axiom of Dominance, described as:

> If any combination A has more of one or of both the goods than B, then
> it is said A dominates B. This axiom states that if A dominates B,
> then the consumer will prefer A to B. This axiom is also known as the
> axiom of non-satiation or of monotonicity.

Given this, my understanding is that given 2 bundles $A(x,y)$ and $B(a,b)$, $A > B$ if $x > a$ *and* $y > b$.

My questions:

* Q1) Is my understanding correct?
* Q2) What if $x but $y>b$? Is the agent indifferent? He will have to be, otherwise completeness will be violated?

Thanks for your help.

**Tags:** microeconomics, preferences


---

## 0 answers

