This paper resorts to the contribution of the science philosopher Gerald Holton to map some of the IR arguments and debates in an unconventional and more insightful way. From this starting point, it is sustained that the formerly all-pervading neorealism-neoinstitutionalism debate has lost its appeal and is attracting less and less interest among scholars. It does not structure the approach of the theoretically-oriented authors any more; at least, not with the habitual intensity. More specifically, we defend that the neo-neo rapprochement, even if it could have demonstrated that international cooperation is possible and relevant in a Realist world, it has also impoverished theoretical debate by hiding some of the most significant issues that preoccupied classical transnationalists. Hence, some authors appear to be trying to rescue some of these arguments in an analytical and systematic fashion, opening up a theoretical querelle that may be the next one to pay attention to.