In the comments on a recent blog post, people questioned my assertion that anyone calling him or herself an Austrian economist needs to read Rothbard’s treatise cover to cover. (To clarify, I was saying anyone who wants to be an Austrian economist...) This raises an interesting question: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions to be an Austrian economist? Does it take a Ph.D.? No, I don’t think so: Gene Callahan doesn’t have a Ph.D. in economics, and he wrote the book (well, a book) on Austrian economics. To switch schools, David Friedman has a Ph.D. in physics, but the guy obviously had an extensive training in mainstream economics; I have no problem calling him a neoclassical economist. We should also distinguish between a professional economist, and just a plain old economist. (Joe Salerno’s popular article is relevant here.)
In my view, it’s much easier for a layperson to legitimately call himself an Austrian economist. So long as he’s done the required reading (including Human Action and MES), and truly understands the concepts involved, then I have no problem if that person says at a cocktail party, “I belong to the Austrian school of economics.” Because our school of thought has always been intertwined with a sense of mission and self-righteousness (I’ll admit these things), I think this is entirely appropriate.
In contrast, just because you read a few books on Heisenberg, you shouldn’t call yourself a theoretical physicist.
