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