Thanks Dr. Herbener for the advice on how to best proceed and be productive in this type of back/forth.
I agree that his view is pretty typical for neoclassicals to hold that the body of knowledge they call “economics” can only be “if/then” propositions which are contingent and non-necessary. Austrians disagree with this.
So, I’ll be sure to point out we DO disagree and hold different positions on the specific dichotomoy between theory (praxeology) and history/forecasting (thymology & entrepreneurship)
Much appreciated!
