There are aspects of economy which are subject to human preference this is what makes Economics a Social Science not a Science.   
Economic models that encompass human preference will need to employ Social Science to derive an outcome, as human preference is subjective the results will be subjected to interpretation of human preference.

Take a monopoly for an example, as soon as the monopolist starts overcharging, human preference shifts, so as not to be overcharged. So it is not possible to create a scientific model of an economy because human preference is a "whack a mole" variable.

Now there are economic laws that are scientific, take the law of supply and demand in determining price for example.  It is possible to argue that supply is not in fact a law, because you can manipulate human preference, by adjusting the money supply and price.

So any economic model that uses variables that counteract laws will be inaccurate and will eventually fail, and thus should be rejected. 

However distill an economic models to the most fundamental level can illustrate simple principals e.g. A scenario to demonstrate supply and demand, defines a law.  It is from this point you can define a scientific model of an economy, and if you do you very quickly learn it can't be modeled, and is best to build on a solid base leaving every individual correcting and controlling his own preference / destiny than to try and control through a central authority divorced from responsibility or consequence.

 Of the fundamentals you list I can understand why one should model on them - except Property rights, I have yet to be convinced.