Hayward's "The Dialectics of World Order"

It is not surprising that there are three distinct dialectics of world order; however, I did find it interesting that not all three were given equal importance in the international relations studies of American college institutions. In Alker Hayward’s The Dialectics of World Order, one of the most important points he continually brings up is the fact that each of the three major approaches – traditional, dialectical, and behavioral science – can be found in the others. There is not a strand which is completely separate, but instead they play off of each other and critic each other in order to come up with their own approach toward international relations.
Hayward also mentioned a specific coding system that was used to decipher how many of each texts for the three different approaches were used in leading universities and colleges in America. While this adequately portrayed the extreme bias toward the behavioral science approach, I found it odd that the readings were not cross listed between the three approaches, but instead only characterized to one specific overall approach. Although I’m sure that the bias would still remain even if the readings were coded to more than one approach if it were mentioned in the reading, I still feel that most of the readings had to have talked about of stepped upon the other two approaches.
Though Hayward continually says that being open and humble to all of these different approaches would allow for adaptive development, it doesn’t seem like many are taking his advice. Although we are in America, and we believe our theories to be the best; it is still helpful to study the theories and approaches of others to learn from their mistakes, but also their benefits.