Who Can Assess Original Contributions To Economic Science?

Is there any dishonor in being an economic historian? Are there economic historians who do not want to be considered economic historians and who would rather be known as economists? Is the difference between an economic historian and an economist specifically related to original contributions to economic science rather than commentary on the contributions of others?

These are the issues being pondered. Who is the judge to decide what is original? Is there a built-in snobbery among academic economists where the same hoops of fire that they must jump through - because of their institutional requirements - are made the criteria for assessing 'original?'

Well, I guess I will rock your world then! Divine economy theory is an original contribution to economic science and it stands ready and able for any and all scrutiny!!! Who among you dares to examine it?

Above, it is stated over and over that the science of economics has to advance and cannot just look back. OK let's see if those who say that really believe it.

For more information go to my website.

To earn a Masters Degree in Divine Economy Theory go here.

Go here to read about MACRO & MICRO Economics Renewed.