An analysis of Utopia and Reality is analyzed through the implication of the differences between Utopia and reality. The difference is from another thesis like ‘Free will and determination’, ‘Theory and Practice’, ‘The intellectual and the Bureaucrat’, ‘Left and Right’, ‘Ethics and politics’.
Andreas Osiander on his article “Twentieth Century International Relations Theory; Idealism revisited” presents a revision of idealist writers. The revised writers focus their understanding of international relations on a standard pattern. The pattern in this question is the ‘Realist’ theory. The most significant difference between Idealism and Realism is in their historical theories. The similarity is that both came about as a result of industrialization. The idealist thinking envisions two views; a newer democratic world that is better suited for functional reasons in the industrial generation than in the traditional generation. The other envisioned thinking by idealist is the particular view of power politics problems got from the fact that the traditional order cannot be instantly displaced but through a long transitional phase.
With reference to the works of Hedley Bull, there exist two international relations theories. The first one is the classical approach while the second is the scientific approach, but we shall focus on the first one. The scientific approach to the theory of the scientific approach is also present in the theory of international systems as stated by Morton A. Kaplan alongside many more others. A Classical approach is based on the existing situation. It is thus desirable if we reject the scientific approach and formulate other objections. However, the scientific approach is most likely to provide very little substantial data towards international relations although it later displaces the classical approach. Bull has also used the work of Thomas Schelling,