John Mueller believes economics is fatally flawed because it cannot account for charitable love between persons. It therefore lacks an explanation of gifts, and thus, of â€œfinal distribution.â€� Muellerâ€™s argument is especially important for Austrians because it draws on a shared heritage in the history of economic thought, namely, ideas from Scholastic political economy. In this article, I survey some of the major points that emerged from the symposium on Muellerâ€™s work, and suggest additional criticisms of his thesis. First, love and gifts can be explained with reference to the exchange element in human action. Second, Muellerâ€™s four-part economic system is based on a somewhat arbitrary classification of basic concepts, including a faulty conceptualization of distribution. Third, love, which Mueller claims economics must explain, can be accounted for through Misesâ€™s notion of thymology. I close by posing some questions for future research, especially regarding the contributions of pre-classical schools to the history of economic thought.