Task – ‘Open-source’ task. Theory – 10 point task – a ‘Open-source’ task. Find/identify main postulates of given great thinker/scholar [from Martin Griffiths

INSTITUTIONALISM and REGIONALISM
Institutionalism and regionalism are two major theoretical paradigms in International Relations (IR).
Institutionalism is a theoretical approach that emphasizes the role of international institutions in shaping international relations. Institutionalists believe that international institutions can help regulate state behavior, reduce the likelihood of conflict, and promote cooperation among states. They argue that international institutions can provide stability, predictability, and a framework for resolving disputes, which in turn can promote peace and stability in the international system.
Regionalism, on the other hand, is a theoretical approach that emphasizes the role of regions in shaping international relations. Regionalists believe that regions can play a significant role in shaping international affairs and that regional organizations and institutions can be a powerful force for promoting cooperation and resolving disputes among states. They argue that regionalism can provide a framework for managing regional security, economic, and political issues, and that it can promote stability and cooperation in the international system.
In conclusion, institutionalism and regionalism are two contrasting perspectives in IR, with institutionalism emphasizing the role of international institutions in shaping international relations and regionalism emphasizing the role of regions and regional organizations. Both perspectives see the role of institutions and organizations as crucial in promoting cooperation and stability in the international system.

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY and GAME THEORY
Rational choice theory and game theory are two major theoretical approaches in International Relations (IR) that deal with the study of decision-making and conflict.
Rational choice theory assumes that actors, including states, make decisions based on a rational calculation of costs and benefits. According to this perspective, actors are motivated by their own self-interest and will act to maximize their own benefits. In the context of IR, rational choice theorists study the behavior of states and their decisions in international relations, assuming that states act in their own self-interest and are motivated by a desire to maximize their power and security.
Game theory, on the other hand, is a theoretical approach that deals with the study of decision-making and conflict in situations where multiple actors are involved. Game theory assumes that actors interact with each other and make decisions based on their beliefs about the actions and decisions of other actors. In the context of IR, game theorists study how states interact with each other and make decisions in international relations, taking into account the strategic interplay between states. Game theory provides a framework for understanding how states make decisions and interact with each other in the absence of a world government to enforce laws or provide stability.
In conclusion, rational choice theory and game theory are two contrasting perspectives in IR that deal with the study of decision-making and conflict. Rational choice theory assumes that actors make decisions based on a rational calculation of costs and benefits, while game theory assumes that actors make decisions based on their beliefs about the actions and decisions of other actors. Both perspectives provide valuable insights into the behavior of states and their decisions in international relations.