Ever since I took my first political science course, I remember being completely fascinated by political theory (especially IR theory) and all of the different disciplines it encompasses. While studying subjects like foreign policy and international law is undoubtedly very important to International Relations, I have personally always felt that studying International Relations theory was essential to my own understanding of world politics and how I perceive the world. Rather than analyzing more “objective” and palpable matters such as trade deals and laws, political theory provides a more abstract multi-disciplinary approach to world politics – on a psychological level, political theory is influenced, for example, by the debate regarding human nature (whether it is inherently good or evil). Whether one shares the Hobbesian or Rousseauian view of human nature will certainly influence one’s assumptions about the world, and thus, by extension, the theory they use to explain the world. Likewise, political theory draws on the disciplines of Sociology, Anthropology, and History (in connection to the psychology of human behaviour) to explain how culture and society socially condition individuals to think a certain way and have particular assumptions about the world (which will have a large impact on the lenses through which one sees world politics and the way they engage with politics). Lastly, International Relations theory also borrows concepts and ideas from Philosophy to discuss epistemological concerns, such as what constitutes “reality” and whether or not we can analyze the world while “being outside of it”. In light of this great diversity of knowledge in IR discourse, I have always been extremely interested in the multifaceted nature of International Relations Theory and the basis it provides for a more thorough understanding of politics. By addressing core issues (e.g. human nature and assumptions about reality) that are not normally considered in everyday politics, I find that studying International Relations Theory is a very useful tool to not only analyze the events that happen every day in world politics (such as the decisions undertaken by global actors), but also to understand my own assumptions about the world.

Although I believe that taking this class and learning more about International Relations Theory will improve my ability to analyze world politics, I am still extremely surprised (and also skeptical) by the contentious nature of the field that we have seen in class so far and whether it is beneficial to politics. While discussing epistemological matters like the nature of reality and whether IR ought to be considered a “discipline” and a “science” are all valid topics of discussion, do they really matter for world politics? Are the subjects being discussed in academia going to have any significant impact on real life events like climate change and poverty? Are the discussions emerging from the theoretical pluralism within the field a privilege of wealthier countries and academics?  What are the real-life implications of the lack of consensus among scholars and decision-makers on politics (if any) and how do those translate into world politics? Even though I am skeptical of the theoretical pluralism in the field and how it actually translates into the real world, I am looking forward to learning more about the several different theories to see how they translate into the “real world” and which one I find more appealing.

By: Henrique Fernandes: 51392165