For there to be exchange, there must be transfer of ownership. When A is exchanged for B, the previous owner of A become the new owner of B, and vice versa. There is no such transfer of ownership in eating, sleeping, or reading. So either Rothbard claims here are false, or he is appealing to a very unusual and bizarre definition of "exchange", which create more confusion than clarity.
Have you read Man, State, and Economy? Rothbard’s conclusion here from the axiom of action follows clear as day from the premises he formulates prior to “action as exchange” in the book.
All action is an attempt to exchange a less satisfactory state of affairs for a more satisfactory one. The actor finds himself (or expects to find himself) in a nonperfect state, and, by attempting to attain his most urgently desired ends, expects to be in a better state. He cannot measure the gain in satisfaction, but he does know which of his wants are more urgent than others, and he does know when his condition has improved. Therefore, all action involves exchange—an exchange of one state of affairs, X, for Y, which the actor anticipates will be a more satisfactory one (and therefore higher on his value scale). If his expectation turns out to be correct, the value of Y on his preference scale will be higher than the value of X, and he has made a net gain in his state of satisfaction or utility. If he has been in error, and the value of the state that he has given up—X—is higher than the value of Y, he has suffered a net loss. This psychic gain (or profit) and loss cannot be measured in terms of units, but the actor always knows whether he has experienced psychic profit
For there to be exchange, there must be transfer of ownership. When A is exchanged for B, the previous owner of A become the new owner of B, and vice versa. There is no such transfer of ownership in eating, sleeping, or reading. So either Rothbard claims here are false, or he is appealing to a very unusual and bizarre definition of "exchange", which create more confusion than clarity.
Have you read Man, State, and Economy? Rothbard’s conclusion here from the axiom of action follows clear as day from the premises he formulates prior to “action as exchange” in the book.
And what exactly does he means by the word "exchange"?
So "exchange" means to him "changing state"?