If you were to teach such a course to PhD students, what would you emphasize?
(a) possibility of modern tools to represent older theoretical ideas associated with market process analysis
(b) possibility of a multiplicity of empirical approaches to illustrate theoretical ideas associated with market process analysis
(c) current research in the market process tradition -- both theory and application
(d) developments in the philosophy of science that are consistent with, but yet provide a novel defense of, the market process approach to economic science
(e) criticisms of the market process approach and possible defenses against the critics
(f) some combination
I fear that the (f) response will result in a course that lacks serious depth on any of the (a)-(e). I do think (e) can be incorporated into (a) - (d). But I think (a) - (d) represent radically different approaches to teaching a PhD course within the confines of a 15 week semester.
Clarification: The pre-requisites for this class would The Austrian Theory of the Market Process I and The Austrian Theory of the Market Process II. So the background in the Austrian tradition would already have been covered. Moreover, students at GMU that would take such a course would also have had the opportunity to take Larry White's monetary course, Pete Leeson's development course, Richard Wagner's public finance course, etc., etc. So my thinking is that I would try to explore some mix between (a) and (b) and with a focus on the task of intellectual arbitrage between the Austrians and the cutting edge of mainstream economics.