His point of view shouldn't matter. He's work is not a philosophical text, it's an empirically based model that explain a part of a real system. You do see physicists complaining around that, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is a bad one, but it's always in a "it does not really matter" context, the same should apply to economics.

Anyway, some times I wonder if economists shouldn't use nonsense made-up names, like physicists do. Coarse's "transaction costs" include way more than contract settling and money transfer taxes. The use of that meaningful term confuses the hell out of everybody, and we get people talking about simplifying contracts in contexts where the highest costs are around acquiring shared knowledge.