Theoretical evolution in international relations is one of the important topics in the knowledge of this field. In examining theoretical evolution, the central issue is how to create new theories, create scientific debates between theories, and ultimately the emergence of different or conflicting theories. The introduction of the concept of civilization into the knowledge of international relations and the emergence of two readings of civilization have revealed the civilizational analysis of international relations in two different approaches. One approach considers civilization as a fixed and static "state", and the other approach considers civilization as a "process". What both approaches have in common is that they both acknowledge the context-centered nature of this theory and accept civilization as a level of analysis and a political category, but their difference lies in providing a different definition of the nature of civilization, the international system, and the analytical outputs of the application of civilization as a level of analysis. The hypothesis of the present study is that the existence of two conflicting approaches to civilization in international relations has shaped a civilizational perspective in international relations, and it seems that international relations is on the verge of the emergence of a civilizational theory. This research attempts to present a clear picture of this debate and a meta-analysis of the requirements for theorizing international relations through a descriptive-analytical method, referring to the texts and meta-analysis of the data produced.