Tell you what, let us cut this down to a basic fact of the show ... WE SEE AND HEAR THEM USING MONEY.
No duh. That's why I'm saying it's self-contradictory. You're the one making these weird leaps of logic to pretend that it's not. The use of money in canon isn't counter to my position; indeed, it's a central feature.
The difference there of course is Jake actual did received monetary value for the sell of the land. It was made clear in the example of the book that Jake (as he said himself) was indeed employing a figure of speech.
What is in the least "self-contradictory" about any of that?
There's nothing self-contradictory about those things in themselves
, obviously. It's the fact that there are other things in canon which, y'know, contradict
the implied or express use of money which are contradictory. Thus rendering canon self-contradictory on this issue.
I don't think you're using that correctly.
not retrievable; irrecoverable; irreparable
And it's "for instance", not "for instants".