Abstract International Relations ( ir ) scholars and students are often presented with four (sometimes five) ‘great debates’ that characterise the ‘state of the discipline’. However, Robert Cox’s 1981 article in Millennium simplified the discussion into two binaries: problem-solving theory vs critical theory. While this configuration has been influential, it has inhibited the reflexivity, complexity, as well as the multidisciplinary nature of the discipline. This paper moves beyond this problematic simplification to construct a ‘third way’, which borrows from both rationalist and critical approaches to craft a somewhat distinct niche in ir theory. It calls for the dual goal of deconstruction and reconstruction. With this approach I seek to show the mutually constitutive synergies between knowledge/theory and practice, and to expatiate on the argument that theory is indeed always for someone and for some purpose, whether such normative underpinnings are latent or manifest.