There is a middle ground between innocent error and wholesale fraud, of course, including interpreting an ambiguous data point or result in a way that is favorable to your thesis — something not unique to economics or even the academic world.
And, while views that reduce possibilities to possible worlds can employ Possibility Haecceitism to express haecceitism, some might be tempted to interpret haecceitism as a thesis about qualitatively indiscernible worlds.
The examiners may or may not offer comments on the thesis at this stage and candidates should not interpret a lack of comments at this point as a negative sign.
Scalia interpreted a lot.
Many scholars would argue that it has joined that canon, even if they interpret his thesis differently.
Perhaps most importantly, some account of the qualitative/non-qualitative distinction is needed to interpret the thesis of haecceitism.
In particular, we should interpret the thesis as follows: every concrete fact either isn't grounded in concrete facts, or is grounded in concrete facts that themselves aren't grounded in concrete facts.
I am more comfortable reading and interpreting primary sources after writing a thesis in history, and now check footnotes regularly in other authors' works to discover how they use certain evidence to draw conclusions and define general trends.
The issue of how to interpret the CCC thesis, however, is at the center of the dispute between the two sides that accept the CCC thesis, namely those who affirm genuine creaturely causation despite accepting the CCC thesis for instance, concurrentists like Leibniz— and those who deny creaturely causation because they accept CCC such as Malebranche.
Benedict Nightingale of the Times interprets Storey's thesis thus: "education and social mobility can damage the heart as well as open the mind".
Graduate Students Sue Lynn Lau chose classical ballet and highly kinetic party dancing as the way to interpret her Ph.D. thesis, "The role of vitamin D in beta-cell function".
