Veda Verse
Menu
Display
Text size
Theme

Indifference Curve Analysis

The ordinal approach: utility is ranked, not measured. Consumers compare bundles and choose the one they prefer within their budget.

5 conceptsAbout 17 min
3 cited passagesHow they are marked

Documented 1 of them. The passage exists in a named text, and the modern concept is a fair reading of what it says.

My view 2 of them. An interpretive parallel. The text does not discuss the modern concept; the link is a reading offered for reflection, not a claim about what the authors meant.

Start with the first concept
01 / 05The ordinal approach
Part one

The concepts

Concept 1 of 5.

The ordinal approach

Utility is ranked, not measured.

Before you read

Do we need to measure satisfaction in utils to explain a consumer's choice?

Core idea

The ordinal approach ranks bundles instead of counting utils, and finds the choice with an indifference curve and a budget line.

Ask a shopper how many utils a masala dosa gives her and you get a blank look. Ask whether she would rather have a dosa or a plate of idli, and she answers at once.

In plain wordsThe ordinal approach explains choice using only rankings: which of two bundles a consumer prefers, or that she likes them equally. It never asks by how much.

Exam definitionA standard textbook definition: in the ordinal approach, utility cannot be measured but can be ranked. The consumer can say whether she prefers one bundle to another or is indifferent between them.

J. R. Hicks and R. G. D. Allen set out the approach in 1934. They built on indifference curves, which F. Y. Edgeworth and Vilfredo Pareto had used earlier.

An example. A bundle is a combination of goods. For a student's week, one bundle is 3 samosas and 6 cups of chai; another is 2 samosas and 9 cups. She need only say "I prefer the first", "I prefer the second" or "either is fine".

The approach uses two tools: the indifference curve, which shows what she likes, and the budget line, which shows what she can afford. Her choice is where the two meet.

Its assumptions.

  • Rational consumer: she seeks the most satisfaction her income allows.
  • Ordinal utility: she can rank bundles but cannot measure satisfaction.
  • Complete preferences: she can compare any two bundles.
  • Transitivity: if she prefers A to B and B to C, she prefers A to C.
  • Consistency: if she prefers A to B, she does not also prefer B to A.
  • Non-satiation: more of a good is preferred to less.
  • Diminishing marginal rate of substitution: the more she has of one good, the less of the other she will give up for it.
  • Divisible goods, and no cardinal measurement of utility.

Don't confuse ranking with measuring. "I prefer A to B" is ordinal. "A gives twice the satisfaction of B" is cardinal. The ordinal approach needs only the first; the table under Consumer equilibrium compares the two approaches.

Where it breaks. Behavioural experiments find that choices shift with how options are presented, and are sometimes intransitive. The approach also assumes she can rank every bundle.

For exams. List the assumptions, name Hicks and Allen, and contrast the approach with the cardinal one.

Go deeper for practitioners

Revealed preference. Paul Samuelson (1938) went a step further. His revealed preference theory reads preferences from what consumers actually buy, without asking them to rank anything. If a buyer chooses bundle A when bundle B was also affordable, she has revealed that she prefers A.

For a firm, this is the difference between survey answers and purchase data: the first reports preferences, the second reveals them.

Check yourself

1. Which assumption says a consumer can compare any two bundles?

Not quite. The answer is “Complete preferences”. Completeness means every pair can be ranked or judged equal. Transitivity, the tempting choice, is about a chain of three: A over B and B over C means A over C.

2. A shopper prefers a masala dosa to a plate of idli but cannot say by how much. Which approach can still explain her choice?

Not quite. The answer is “The ordinal approach, which needs only rankings”. The ordinal approach asks only which bundle she prefers. The cardinal approach needs her to say by how much, in utils or in money, which she cannot.

3. A shopper prefers tea to coffee, coffee to juice, and juice to tea. Which assumption has she broken?

Not quite. The answer is “Transitivity”. Preferring tea to coffee and coffee to juice should mean preferring tea to juice. Completeness still holds: she has ranked every pair.

Ancient lens
  1. Documented

    Ranking preferences and the better and the pleasant

    The Kaṭha Upaniṣad sets out a ranking, not a measurement: the good (śreyas) and the pleasant (preyas) both present themselves, and the wise person examines them and chooses. It is a classical statement of ordinal choice, where the question is which option is preferred.

    श्रेयश्च प्रेयश्च मनुष्यमेतस्तौ सम्परीत्य विविनक्ति धीरः । śreyaś ca preyaś ca manuṣyam etas tau samparītya vivinakti dhīraḥ. Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1.2.2

    About this text: UpaniṣadsDiscuss

    What it adds

    A ranking, not a measurement: the good and the pleasant both present themselves, and the wise person examines them and chooses.

    Where they differ

    The Kaṭha Upaniṣad concerns the choice between the good and the pleasant. The chapter's ordinal choice is between bundles of two goods.

Reflect & discuss

“Rank three things you could spend a free evening on. Could you say by how much one beats another?”

Kept on this device. Nobody sees it unless you share it.

Still unsure, or see it differently? Ask the community about thisYou’ll sign in first if you haven’t. Your note above stays private.

One-page summary
The ordinal approach
  • The ordinal approach ranks bundles; it never measures satisfaction.
  • Hicks and Allen set it out in 1934. Its tools are the indifference curve and the budget line.
  • Assumptions: a rational consumer, ordinal utility, complete, transitive and consistent preferences, non-satiation, diminishing MRS and divisible goods.
  • Revealed preference (Samuelson, 1938) reads preferences from what consumers actually buy.
Remember

Cardinal asks how much. Ordinal asks which is preferred.

Recall it from a blank page
Concept 2 of 5.

Indifference curve

All the bundles that give the same satisfaction.

Before you read

Can two indifference curves cross?

Core idea

An indifference curve joins every bundle of two goods that gives the same satisfaction; it slopes down, bows toward the origin and never crosses another.

A student would be just as happy with 3 samosas and 6 cups of chai in a week as with 2 samosas and 9 cups. Join every such equally good bundle and you get a curve.

In plain wordsAn indifference curve joins all the bundles of two goods that leave a consumer equally satisfied.

Exam definitionA standard textbook definition: an indifference curve (IC) is the locus of combinations of two goods that give the consumer the same satisfaction, so that she is indifferent among them.

An example. The student's indifference schedule lists five bundles she likes equally: A (1 samosa, 13 cups), B (2, 9), C (3, 6), D (4, 4) and E (5, 3). Plotted, they trace one curve.

A B C D E IC₁ IC₂ 13 9 6 4 3 1 2 3 4 5 Cups of chai (Y) Samosas (X)
Every bundle on IC₁ satisfies the student equally. The curve falls and bows toward the origin; IC₂, further out, is a higher level of satisfaction.

A set of such curves is an indifference map. Each curve further from the origin is a higher level of satisfaction.

Its properties, and why each holds:

  • Downward sloping: more of X requires less of Y to keep satisfaction the same. A rising curve would hold a bundle with more of both goods, which non-satiation says is better.
  • Convex to the origin: it reflects a diminishing marginal rate of substitution (the next concept).
  • Never intersect: each IC represents one distinct level of utility. If two crossed, the shared bundle would rank equal to both, and transitivity would make two different levels equal.
  • Higher IC, higher utility: curves farther from the origin are preferred, because they reach bundles with more of both goods.

Some textbooks add that indifference curves need not be parallel, and do not touch either axis, because the consumer wants some of both goods.

Don't confuse "indifferent" with "uninterested". Here it means equally satisfied by two bundles. Nor confuse an IC with a budget line. An IC shows what she likes; a budget line shows what her money allows.

Where it breaks. For perfect substitutes, such as two brands she treats as identical, the IC is a straight line. For perfect complements, such as left and right shoes, it is L-shaped: an extra left shoe adds nothing. Real preferences are also hard to map, and they change.

In practice. Market researchers estimate such trade-offs. Conjoint analysis asks buyers to choose between product profiles, such as longer battery life against a lower price, to learn what they would give up.

For exams. State the four properties with reasons, the proof that ICs cannot cross, and the shapes for substitutes and complements.

Check yourself

1. An indifference curve shows…

Not quite. The answer is “Bundles of two goods that give equal satisfaction”. Equal cost describes the budget line, the usual mix-up. An indifference curve is about tastes, not money.

2. A consumer sees two brands of packaged water as identical and swaps them one for one. What shape is her indifference curve?

Not quite. The answer is “A straight downward-sloping line”. Perfect substitutes have a constant MRS, so the curve is straight. An L-shape belongs to perfect complements, such as left and right shoes.

3. Why can two indifference curves not cross?

Not quite. The answer is “The shared bundle would make two different satisfaction levels equal”. A bundle on both curves ranks equal to each, so by transitivity the two levels would be equal, a contradiction. Convexity is a separate property: crossing curves could each be convex.

Ancient lens
  1. My view

    Indifference and equanimity

    The Gītā advises treating pleasure and pain, gain and loss, victory and defeat alike (sukha-duḥkhe same kṛtvā). Indifference between bundles is not that teaching, and the resemblance is in the word only. The text is about steadiness of mind under outcomes, not about equal-satisfaction trade-offs.

    A reading offered for reflection, not a claim about what the authors meant.

    “Treating pleasure and pain, gain and loss, victory and defeat alike.” सुखदुःखे समे कृत्वा लाभालाभौ जयाजयौ । sukhaduḥkhe same kṛtvā lābhālābhau jayājayau. Bhagavad Gītā 2.38; 2.48

    About this text: Bhagavad GītāDiscuss

    What it adds

    Treating pleasure and pain, gain and loss, victory and defeat alike: steadiness of mind under outcomes.

    Where they differ

    The resemblance is in the word only. The text is about steadiness under outcomes, not about equal-satisfaction trade-offs.

Reflect & discuss

“Name two different bundles of things that would leave you equally happy. What would you give up for each?”

Kept on this device. Nobody sees it unless you share it.

Still unsure, or see it differently? Ask the community about thisYou’ll sign in first if you haven’t. Your note above stays private.

One-page summary
Indifference curve
  • An indifference curve joins bundles of two goods that give equal satisfaction; a set of them is an indifference map.
  • Downward sloping, convex to the origin (diminishing MRS), never intersecting, and higher is better.
  • Curves cannot cross: by transitivity, two levels of satisfaction would be equal.
  • Perfect substitutes: a straight line. Perfect complements: an L-shape.
Remember

Downward, convex, never crossing, higher is better.

Recall it from a blank page
Concept 3 of 5.

Marginal rate of substitution (MRS)

How much of one good you will give up for another.

Before you read

As you have more of X and less of Y, do you give up Y more readily or less readily?

Core idea

MRS is how much of one good a consumer will give up for one more unit of another while staying equally satisfied, and it diminishes.

The student's second samosa is worth 4 cups of chai to her. By the time she has 4 samosas, she would give up only 1 cup for a fifth.

In plain wordsThe marginal rate of substitution (MRS) is how much of one good a consumer would give up for one more unit of another, and still feel as well off.

Exam definitionA standard textbook definition: MRS of X for Y is the amount of Y a consumer is willing to give up for one more unit of X, staying on the same indifference curve.

MRSxy = −ΔY ÷ ΔX = MUx ÷ MUy

An example. Read the student's indifference schedule from bundle to bundle:

BundleSamosas (X)Cups of chai (Y)MRSxy (cups given up for one more samosa)
A113—
B2913 − 9 = 4
C369 − 6 = 3
D446 − 4 = 2
E534 − 3 = 1

MRS falls from 4 to 1. This is the principle of diminishing marginal rate of substitution.

Why it diminishes. As she has more samosas, each extra one adds less: its marginal utility falls. As chai gets scarce, each cup matters more: its marginal utility rises. Since MRS = MUx ÷ MUy, the ratio shrinks.

Why it makes the curve convex. MRS is the slope of the indifference curve, ignoring the minus sign. The slope flattens as she moves down the curve, so the curve bows toward the origin.

Don't confuse MRS with the price ratio. MRS is the consumer's own rate of exchange, set by her tastes. Px ÷ Py is the market's rate, set by prices. Equilibrium is where they match. Nor confuse MRS with MRTS, the marginal rate of technical substitution: the producer's version, along an isoquant.

Where it breaks. For perfect substitutes MRS is constant, and the curve is a straight line. For perfect complements she will not substitute at all. Diminishing MRS is an assumption that fits most ordinary pairs of goods, not a law that holds for all.

For exams. Work out MRS from a schedule, explain why it diminishes, and link it to convexity. Remember MRSxy = MUx ÷ MUy.

A diminishing MRS gives the convex curve.

Check yourself

1. MRSxy equals…

Not quite. The answer is “MUx ÷ MUy”. MRSxy = −ΔY ÷ ΔX = MUx ÷ MUy. Px ÷ Py is the price ratio: the market's rate, which equals MRS only at equilibrium.

2. A student moves from 3 samosas and 6 cups of chai to 4 samosas and 4 cups, equally satisfied. What is her MRSxy?

Not quite. The answer is “2 cups per samosa”. She gives up 6 − 4 = 2 cups for 1 more samosa, so MRS = 2. 0.5 divides the wrong way round: MRSxy is ΔY ÷ ΔX.

3. Why does MRS diminish as she gets more samosas?

Not quite. The answer is “Each extra samosa adds less, and each cup left matters more”. MRS = MUx ÷ MUy: MUx falls as samosas pile up, and MUy rises as chai gets scarce. Prices and income play no part along an indifference curve.

Reflect & discuss

“Think of a trade you would make easily at first and refuse later. What changed?”

Kept on this device. Nobody sees it unless you share it.

Still unsure, or see it differently? Ask the community about thisYou’ll sign in first if you haven’t. Your note above stays private.

One-page summary
Marginal rate of substitution (MRS)
  • MRSxy: the amount of Y a consumer gives up for one more unit of X, satisfaction held constant.
  • MRSxy = −ΔY ÷ ΔX = MUx ÷ MUy.
  • In the schedule MRS falls 4, 3, 2, 1: diminishing MRS.
  • MRS is the slope of the indifference curve; as it diminishes, the curve becomes convex.
Remember

A diminishing MRS gives the convex curve.

Recall it from a blank page
Concept 4 of 5.

Budget line

Every bundle you can afford.

Before you read

Can a consumer afford a bundle that lies outside the budget line?

Core idea

The budget line shows every bundle of two goods a consumer can buy by spending all her income; its slope is −Px ÷ Py.

Before asking what a student would like, ask what she can afford. With ₹120 for the week, samosas at ₹20 and chai at ₹10 a cup, some bundles are simply out of reach.

In plain wordsThe budget line shows every combination of two goods you can buy if you spend all your money.

Exam definitionA standard textbook definition: the budget line, or price line, is the locus of all combinations of two goods a consumer can buy by spending a given income at given prices.

Px × X + Py × Y = M     slope = −Px ÷ Py

M is income; Px and Py are the prices of X and Y. Conditions: income fixed, prices constant, entire income spent, two goods considered.

The example worked out.

  1. All on chai: ₹120 ÷ ₹10 = 12 cups. All on samosas: ₹120 ÷ ₹20 = 6 samosas. These are the two ends of the line.
  2. Slope: −Px ÷ Py = −20 ÷ 10 = −2. Each extra samosa costs her 2 cups of chai: its opportunity cost.
  3. 3 samosas and 6 cups cost ₹60 + ₹60 = ₹120: on the line, affordable.
  4. 2 samosas and 5 cups cost ₹40 + ₹50 = ₹90: inside the line, affordable with money left over.
  5. 5 samosas and 4 cups cost ₹100 + ₹40 = ₹140: outside the line, not affordable.

How the line moves. If her income rises to ₹180, the line shifts out in parallel: 18 cups or 9 samosas, with the same slope. If the samosa price falls to ₹15, the line pivots out along the samosa axis to 8 samosas (₹120 ÷ ₹15), while the chai end stays at 12. If both prices change in the same proportion, the line shifts in parallel, as with a change in income.

₹120 budget Income ₹180 Samosa at ₹15 18 12 6 8 9 Cups of chai Samosas
With ₹120 she can buy up to 12 cups or 6 samosas. More income shifts the line out in parallel; a cheaper samosa swings it out along the samosa axis only.

Don't confuse the budget line with an indifference curve. The budget line is about money: income and prices, and it is straight. The indifference curve is about tastes, and it is curved. Neither alone tells you the choice.

Where it breaks. It assumes the price stays the same whatever quantity she buys; bulk discounts put a kink in the line. It also ignores saving and borrowing, and it pictures only two goods.

In practice. A manager's fixed budget works the same way: ₹5 lakh for training, split between classroom days and online courses, has its own budget line.

For exams. Write the equation, find the intercepts (M ÷ Py and M ÷ Px) and the slope, and show the effect of a change in income or in one price.

Check yourself

1. The slope of the budget line is…

Not quite. The answer is “−Px ÷ Py”. Each extra unit of X costs Px ÷ Py units of Y. −Py ÷ Px is the tempting inversion; MUx ÷ MUy is MRS, the slope of the indifference curve.

2. Income is ₹120, samosas cost ₹20 and chai ₹10 a cup. Which bundle lies outside the budget line?

Not quite. The answer is “5 samosas and 4 cups”. 5 × ₹20 + 4 × ₹10 = ₹140, more than ₹120. 3 samosas and 6 cups cost exactly ₹120, as do 6 samosas alone: both lie on the line.

3. The samosa price falls from ₹20 to ₹15; income (₹120) and the chai price stay the same. What happens to the budget line?

Not quite. The answer is “It pivots out along the samosa axis to 8 samosas”. Only the samosa end moves: ₹120 ÷ ₹15 = 8. A parallel shift needs a change in income, or in both prices in the same proportion.

Ancient lens
  1. My view

    The budget line and spreading effort across three aims

    Kauṭilya says to enjoy pleasures without breaking the claims of right conduct and wealth, or to pursue the three aims in balance, each supporting the others. This is an allocation across competing goods under a constraint, with the constraint stated in moral terms. The text sets a moral limit on pleasure, not a money budget, so the comparison with the budget line is a reading.

    A reading offered for reflection, not a claim about what the authors meant.

    धर्मार्थाविरोधेन कामं सेवेत । dharmārthāvirodhena kāmaṃ seveta. Arthaśāstra 1.7.3

    About this text: ArthaśāstraDiscuss

    What it adds

    An allocation across competing goods under a constraint, with the constraint stated in moral terms.

    Where they differ

    Kauṭilya's advice is about pleasure, right conduct and wealth. The budget line is about money and two goods.

Reflect & discuss

“What are the two things you most often trade off with the same money or time?”

Kept on this device. Nobody sees it unless you share it.

Still unsure, or see it differently? Ask the community about thisYou’ll sign in first if you haven’t. Your note above stays private.

One-page summary
Budget line
  • Px × X + Py × Y = M: every bundle affordable at a given income and prices.
  • Conditions: income fixed, prices constant, entire income spent, two goods.
  • Slope −Px ÷ Py: the opportunity cost of one good in units of the other. The ends are M ÷ Py and M ÷ Px.
  • A change in income shifts the line in parallel; a change in one price pivots it.
  • Bundles on or inside the line are affordable; those outside are not.
Remember

Slope: −Px/Py.

Recall it from a blank page
Concept 5 of 5.

Consumer equilibrium

The highest curve the budget can reach.

Before you read

Where on the budget line does a consumer reach the highest satisfaction?

Core idea

The consumer is in equilibrium on the highest indifference curve her budget line reaches, where MRS = Px ÷ Py.

The student now knows what she likes and what she can afford. Her best choice is where those two pictures meet.

In plain wordsConsumer equilibrium is the affordable bundle that puts the consumer on her highest possible indifference curve.

Exam definitionA standard textbook statement: the consumer is in equilibrium where the budget line is tangent to the highest attainable indifference curve. There MRSxy = Px ÷ Py, and the curve is convex to the origin.

MRSxy = Px ÷ Py

At this point of tangency, the slope of the IC equals the slope of the budget line.

E IC₃ IC₂ IC₁ Budget line Good Y Good X
IC₃ lies above the budget line and cannot be reached. IC₁ is affordable but not the best. E, where IC₂ touches the line, gives the highest attainable satisfaction.

The example worked out. She has ₹120; samosas cost ₹20 and chai ₹10, so Px ÷ Py = 2.

  1. Cost the bundles on her curve. A (1, 13) costs ₹150; B (2, 9) and E (5, 3) cost ₹130 each. All are out of reach.
  2. C (3, 6) and D (4, 4) cost exactly ₹120 each: both are on the budget line.
  3. Between C and D her MRS is 2: she would give 2 cups for a samosa, and the market charges 2 cups. On a smooth curve, this is the point of tangency.

Why nowhere else. Where her MRS is above 2, a samosa is worth more cups to her than it costs, so buying more samosas leaves her better off. Where it is below 2, as between D and E (MRS 1), she gains by buying fewer.

Two conditions: MRS equals the price ratio, and the curve is convex there, so the tangency gives the most satisfaction rather than the least.

The link to the cardinal approach. MRS = MUx ÷ MUy, so the condition MUx ÷ MUy = Px ÷ Py rearranges to MUx ÷ Px = MUy ÷ Py. That is the equi-marginal rule, reached without measuring utility.

BasisCardinal approachOrdinal approach
MeasurementUtility measured in utilsUtility ranked; no numerical measure
ToolsTU and MUIndifference curves and MRS
EquilibriumMU per rupee equalisedMRS = price ratio (Px/Py)
FocusAbsolute satisfactionRelative preference
PracticalityMeasurement is difficultMore practical, widely used

Don't confuse equilibrium with the highest curve or the cheapest bundle. Higher curves exist, such as IC₃, but she cannot afford them. A cheaper bundle inside the line leaves money, and satisfaction, unused.

Where it breaks. If her MRS stays above the price ratio everywhere, she spends everything on one good: a corner solution, with no tangency. Real buyers also rarely know their curves, and habit plays a part.

In practice. Indifference curve analysis compares policies. It shows that a cash transfer leaves a consumer at least as well off as a price subsidy costing the government the same.

Memory cue: cardinal asks how much? Ordinal asks which is preferred?

Go deeper for practitioners

Price effect = substitution effect + income effect. Suppose the samosa price falls. Samosas are now cheaper than chai in relative terms, so she buys more of them: the substitution effect. Her ₹120 also buys more in total, as if her income had risen: the income effect.

For a normal good both effects raise the quantity bought. For an inferior good the income effect works the other way. In a Giffen good, a rare case, it outweighs the substitution effect, so quantity falls when price falls.

From equilibrium to demand. Join the equilibrium points as income changes and you get the income-consumption curve. Join them as one price changes and you get the price-consumption curve, from which the demand curve is derived.

Check yourself

1. At consumer equilibrium in the ordinal approach…

Not quite. The answer is “MRS equals the price ratio, Px ÷ Py”. The slope of the indifference curve equals the slope of the budget line. Equal prices are not needed: only the ratio of prices must match her MRS.

2. Samosas cost ₹20 and chai ₹10. At her current bundle a student would give 3 cups of chai for one more samosa. What should she do?

Not quite. The answer is “Buy more samosas and less chai”. Her MRS (3) is above the price ratio (2): a samosa is worth 3 cups to her but costs only 2. She gains by moving toward samosas until her MRS falls to 2.

3. With ₹120, samosas at ₹20 and chai at ₹10, which bundles on her curve can she afford: A (1, 13), B (2, 9), C (3, 6), D (4, 4), E (5, 3)?

Not quite. The answer is “C and D, which cost ₹120 each”. C costs ₹60 + ₹60 and D ₹80 + ₹40: ₹120 each. B and E cost ₹130 and A ₹150, all above her budget. Between C and D her MRS is 2, equal to the price ratio.

Reflect & discuss

“Think of a choice you made within a budget. Was your choice at the highest level you could reach?”

Kept on this device. Nobody sees it unless you share it.

Still unsure, or see it differently? Ask the community about thisYou’ll sign in first if you haven’t. Your note above stays private.

One-page summary
Consumer equilibrium
  • Equilibrium: the highest affordable indifference curve, where it touches the budget line.
  • Conditions: MRS = Px ÷ Py, and the curve convex at that point.
  • Example: ₹120, samosas at ₹20 and chai at ₹10 give C (3, 6) or D (4, 4), where MRS = 2.
  • Cardinal: MU per rupee equalised. Ordinal: MRS = price ratio. Since MRS = MUx ÷ MUy, they are the same condition.
Remember

Cardinal asks how much. Ordinal asks which is preferred.

Last concept Test yourself on the chapter
Recall it from a blank page

Translations are paraphrases. Arthaśāstra references follow Kangle's critical edition; Bhagavad Gītā references are chapter.verse; Tirukkuṟaḷ references are couplet numbers. Check each reference against your own edition before quoting it in submitted work.

Test yourself

All 15 questions from this chapter, in a new order.

The ones you miss join your review, and come back until they stick.

Start the chapter test

How this chapter connects

Worked out from the glossary terms each chapter uses. A chapter is listed when two or more terms are shared.

Its ideas are used in

Texts quoted in this chapter: Upaniṣads, Arthaśāstra, Bhagavad Gītā. All the classical texts.

Cite this page
  • APA

    Veda Verse. (2026, October 18). Indifference Curve Analysis. https://myvedaverse.in/learn/indifference-curves

  • MLA

    “Indifference Curve Analysis.” Veda Verse, 18 Oct. 2026, myvedaverse.in/learn/indifference-curves.

  • Chicago

    Veda Verse. “Indifference Curve Analysis.” Last modified October 18, 2026. https://myvedaverse.in/learn/indifference-curves.

Check the form your course asks for. The date is when this page's content last changed.