Professor Lee writes that "heterodox economics involves a secular explanation   
of economic activity."  I thought that a secular explanation is a sine qua non   
condition of ANY science.  In this respect "religious physics" is also a   
contradiction in terms.  Nevertheless, the pseudoscientific "Intelligent   
Design" explanations in biology - generously funded and supported by political   
pressure - can serve as a cautionary tale to other scientific disciplines.  
  
The point made by him is, of course, taken, namely that not everything that is   
not "orthodox economics" can be called "heterodox economics".  Perhaps the   
term is not appropriate.  I always preferred the term "political economy", but   
this is sadly appropriated.  
  
Professor Gafney, on the other hand, makes a very important point, i.e., that   
the values of the religious right had permeated economics and contaminated it   
with a reactionary ethos.  How does the list feel about this?  
  
Nicholas Theocarakis