As I read in another blog, allow me to place a disclaimer on my own personal rant. Despite my basic lack of understanding for blogs in general (I would much rather have a good debate in person/conversation) I do understand that someone other than my teacher and group might be reading this and that is personally very unsettling. Regardless, here goes...
Reading about IR theory and why scholars/students study it leaves with an overwhelming sense of frustration that I also read in other posts without as much emotion behind it. Obviously everything in this world is in some state of flux/evolution. That is obvious by the sheer fact that time moves on, and nothing is stagnant. So why do we need to discuss the need to continuously reassess theories. Maybe the definition of a theory should not be considered such a grounded and certain thing. Maybe we should inherently understand that everything evolves and just note things like trends. Are we getting caught up in a label rather than in the content? Maybe.
The need to study basic International Relations "theories" (as we traditionally refer to them) is obvious. If you cannot understand basic trends, patterns, and human inclinations, you in no way can understand what is to potentially happen in the future. If nothing else, it is for pure intellectual exercise.
In one of the posts the acknowledgment that Americans are overwhelmingly self-centered was presented. This ties into what I was previously debating regarding the general 'missing the point' of many of our actions. The world does not revolve around us and if we took any history into account, we would be very aware that no super power ever stays a super power, and maybe we should become a bit more humble/considerate of the rest of the world. But that goes into a whole other rant that I can save for a later time...