History  of  economic  science  is  an exercise in the development and
   application of principles of economic science. Mr. David Brett, who sounds
   like a historicist, might do himself good if he cares to learn about the
   intellectual  battle  between  scientists  and  historicists, in which
   historicists lost, more than a century ago.  He ought to know who Carl
   Menger was and why he fought off the historicists. The idea of putting the
   historical study of the development of scientific principles of a discipline
   in a category of history, archaeology, and religion seems to be highly
   laughable. I have no doubt that such a proposal comes from one who has no
   idea  what  the history of thought contains. Let me emphasize that HES
   constitutes a validation procedure for current research on the principles of
   economic science. [Should I write an article on this?]

   I would encourage Mr. Brett to consider the idea of an inherited house,
   built by ancestors, but still being inhabited by their successors, who keep
   making changes, and look back in the old treasure chests whenever they wish
   to solve some problem. This is because principles of science are timeless,
   despite the evolution of ideas. To suppose that the study of history of
   scientific ideas is just some kind of old curiosity shop of useless relics
   similar to archeological antiques is a monumental blunder.

   Mr. Brett might also enlighten him if he would care to study Thomas Kuhns
   idea of the Structure of Scientific Revolution and how others have looked at
   the same issues. He would then be able to understand that science is not the
   result of a lone wunderkind who delivers new bits of knowledge from out of
   the complete void of ignorance, but through a very organized process of
   ceaseless work of great many scientists all of whom are trying to solve
   problems, all the time sharing ideas on how to solve problems. The fist use
   of  the  history of economic science is to learn about ways of solving
   problems  that our predecessors tried with varying degrees of success,
   including lasting achievements.

   It is usual among the uninitiated to suppose that the present generation
   possesses the refined knowledge and the earlier generations only had junk. I
   suggest that Mr. Brett should enroll in a course on the history of economic
   science. I feel sad that Israel Kirzner has retired; otherwise I would
   suggest him to go to NYU and study under Kirzner. I may still offer him the
   idea  that he can take a few courses from Peter Boettke. He would then
   realize that the history is pretty alive, that it is a conversation with our
   seniors who are still exercising their minds. We need to see that we are
   continuing a process of learning that was begun long ago but that has not
   been finished. I hope one understands why a son takes guidance from his
   father.

   Mohammad Gani