That is where you an I differ in opinion. Year after year EASA revises the theoretical requirements (read; reduces the topics to be known for the exams) in a more or less logical manner. The days one had to study worldwide climatology and INS etc etc are gone. And the actual questions are no brain-teasers neither.
It is nowhere near a university level (even for the ATPL). That was different in the pre-JAA days, when you were required to be able to design you own jet-engined aircraft with astronavigation tools and such. At least it was in Belgium...
Instead of criticizing EASA for what the IR could be (FAA alike) I'd like to congratulate them (already) with the job they've done over the years. My impression is that from time to time they tend to be open for improvement.