The reprinting of this book is long overdue. The Economic Point of View explains the difference between economizing and action. As Kirzner puts it "Economizing consists in the allocation of scarce resources among competing ends. Acting, in the praxeological sense, consists in selecting a pattern of behavior designed to further the actor's purposes". The main points in this book are subtle enough to have been overlooked by nearly all modern economists.
The Economic Point of View is important not only as a history of economic thought, but as an explanation of where our thinking about economics went wrong. Lionel Robbins shaped modern economics with his idea that economics is about choosing between means of attaining given ends. The simplicity of Robbins' conception of economics makes it persuasive. The idea that we must choose between ends due to scarcity seems so obvious that it is hard to imagine fault with this idea. Mises taught Kirzner well enough to see the weaknesses with the Robbinsian conception of economics.
The dominance of Robbins type economics has led economic theory to a number of dead ends. Economists came to think only in terms of optimization problems, while ignoring real market processes driven by human action. Given that economics drifted into further greater error after the publication of The Economic Point of View, one could judge this book a failure. Such a judgment would, however, be unfair. Kirzner explains the importance of the idea of action, as opposed to economizing, in a relatively clear and concise manner (as compared to Mises). Kirzner succeeded both in explaining the importance of the action principle and the shortcomings of the economizing principle. The failure of many to appreciate (or even notice) important ideas is not the fault of the messenger. The ideas in this book are important. Anyone interested in understanding the fundamentals of economic science should read this book, along with Carl Menger's 'Principles of Economics' and Buchanan's 'Cost and Choice' and 'What should Economists do?'.