Introduction: antiscientific attitudes within psychotherapy: philosophical, scientific, and political/psychological considerations.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to B S Held.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
In all of the articles of this special section (Beutler & Harwood, Erwin, Jopling, and Spence), the authors express their commitment to a conventional view of truth and objectivity, a view which serves as a precondition for their commitment to a true science of psychotherapy. In my concluding comments, I first describe the particular focus of each author's concerns about current standards of truth and objectivity in the field. I then anticipate the ways in which their arguments might be challenged by those who now challenge the possibility of truth and objectivity (in any conventional sense) within psychotherapy, or, more broadly, within the human sciences, or, more radically, within the physical sciences.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The epistemology debates within the field of family therapy have become relatively infrequent in the last year or so, perhaps as a consequence of the confusion they have generated for many family therapists. This article maintains that the primary reason for the confusion is a failure to distinguish clearly between the conventional meaning of the term epistemology, which concerns the nature of knowledge, and the unconventional meaning given the term in family therapy, which concerns the nature of what we know. It is proposed that the confusion can be diminished by understanding the relationship between the two meanings, which are here distinguished as epistemology (meaning 1) and epistemology (meaning 2) respectively. Particular attention is given to the logical consequences of adopting a position on epistemology (meaning 1)--e.g., is the knower capable of knowing an independent reality, or does the act of knowing make its own reality?--or on epistemology (meaning 2)--e.g., is causality linear or nonlinear?. The relevance and implications of these problems for the theory and practice of family therapy are discussed.