For the past few years I have been stressing to my graduate students the difference between Austrian economics and Austrian economics, mainly to highlight the career advantages of focusing their efforts on contributing to economics. However, I am always quick to point out that both are legitimate and worthy of serious research.
In fact, at the APEE conference this year I heard a wonderful presentation by Bryan McCannon, a professor at Wake Forest University, on teaching Austrian economics in Austria. After hearing Bryan's presentation, I came back to GMU and offered to teach such a course to our Dean, and I believe in the next few years such a course will in fact be offered. I have been fascinated by the entire Viennese culture that gave birth to the Austrian school since my senior thesis on methodenstreit under Dr. Sennholz back at Grove City College.
Works such as William Johnston's The Austrian Mind, and Allan Janik and Stephen Toulmin's Wittgenstein's Vienna have long been on my bookshelf and on my recommended reading list for students interested in Austrian economics. Such scholarly interest can only be pursued effectively if the study of economics is combined with a deep knowledge of the continental philosophical traditions that were in the air (from Aristotle and Kant, to Husserl and phenomenology, to the Vienna circle, etc.) as well as the educational structures and the different active research groups that were in operation.
Think about all the great innovations in economic theory that emerged from Vienna from 1880-1938 --- the subjectivist/marginalist revolution associated with Menger, Wieser, Bohm-Bawerk, the monetary theory of the trade cycle as developed by Mises and Hayek, the formal equilibrium theorizing that emerged in Karl Menger's seminar (e.g., Abraham Wald), and the development of game theory and its application to economics by Morgenstern.
Robert Leonard's Von Neumann, Morgenstern, and The Creation of Game Theory (Cambridge, 2010) is simply a brilliant exposition of (as the title suggests) the development of game theory. But Leonard also situates the economics and mathematical developments in the broader philosophical and historical context. Leonard's work is a brilliant blend of the history of economics and the history of science approaches to the study of the history of political economy. I cannot recommend this book strongly enough; it is in my opinion an awe inspiring piece of scholarship. In fact, this fall I will be leading a study group on "formal theories of the market process" and Leonard's book will be how we start the group.
It doesn't matter if you are an Austrian economists, or an Austrian economists, you have to get this book and study it closely.