dear Mr. Gilpin and Mr. Cox

I've been having this thinking since last week. But i haven't got a chance to reveal it on the IPE exam. the comparative kind of question didn't come up.


Dear Mr. Gilpin,

Albeit it's weird. I want to express my admiration and appreciation to your own thinking. Not in the way Mr. Cox and other Neo-Gramscianists do. I would admit that I've been interested in your perpectives since i read your 1987's book and the corrected later one, the 2001's one that is. I admire the way you conceded your mistakes due to historical processes, and offered the whole new thinkings. Together with your wise but diplomatical-sensible anwer to Mr. Cox's critics. Bethinking me of the way Mr. Einstein did in his letter responding to the critics adressed to him. Notwithstanding you both had different styles.

All in all, you had offered a complete new set of thoughts of the contemporary world of political economy. The encroachment of both. Perceiving the world as it was. Offering the problem-solving theories. You didn't appropriately neglect every little aspect as Mr. Cox accused you. But, you just didn't EMPHASIZE it the way Mr. Cox did.

Hence, I admire you for that.
Respectively,
-me-

Dear Mr. Cox,

I wouldn't say i don't appreciate your perspectives. I admire your efforts. Although, they are way too complex and multifaceted to comprise. It seemed like you tried to confine all aspects with no significant boundary. But i do agree with you that "theory does follow history". Thus, theory creates tendency. And you alleged that all those aspects, i.e. human's behaviors and their ideas, were what developed history. But, have you ever thought what's brought about those aspects (behavioral and ideational ones)? tendencies, aren't they? If so, then we're back to square one. tendency is the roots of all things. It seems like deciding which comes first, egg or chicken? tendency or history?. Beyond that, do you think by examining the cause of the realities evolving around us would give solutions? For me, it sounds like a backward-thinking. Instead of look forward to solve the problems, you sought to look back to what causing the problems.
Mind me, Mr. Cox...the problems wouldn't be solved by examining the grounds. They're taken into account to solve the problem. But not the way you appraised it. Acknowledge the reality as what it is. Use the cause to examine, allright, but more importantly, put your priority to deal with the problem-solving motion by look forward.

Having said that, I remain appreciating of what you did. You're brilliant. It's just, people need more original perspectives. Not the one that's based on critisizing another existing perspectives. But again, you're brilliant. That's the reason you've been acknowledged in the study of IPE. Salute!

Sincerely,
-me-


So...my connclusion would be
(gosh..that reminds me of Nicki Smith with her: "don't forget to build a good introduction explaining your answer, why it's important, discuss all the debates, and build a good conclusion of what you're written...pretty much the summary from the beginning of your essay, just copy and paste them, to save your time... Allright Nicki, you know we have words limit, don't you? and why would we repeat the same things while we can develop better sentences in the conclusion? and what's with mentioning the debates all the time?)

Where was i? Oh yea...conclusion. It's interesting that we have different thoughts in the world. So many different colors. Black, blue, white, grey, green, red. Mr. Gilpin or Mr. Cox...Each is different human beings with different ways of thinking. Albeit, they've brought colors to IPE, if not politics. I regard them, and appreciate them as well.

My opinion would be a bit subjective, as i think nothing is completely objective in this world. When it comes to one's thinking, how objective it is, it still has a subjective part within. Because one thought has its own way compared to another.
And..yeah, pretty much that's all!