Peter Wolff's essay presents an incisive argument that studies of infancy conducted by “psychoanalytically informed” investigators have often been slipshod science empowered by lazy ideologies. Unbridled analogizing billed as “systematic observation,” logical strategies of enumerative (rather than eliminative) induction, and rhetorical circularities presented as cross-disciplinary insights are characteristic “methods” of a field in which—to pick just one example—the self psychological infant is found to be an immature version of the self psychological adult, the self psychological adult is found to be a mature version of the self psychological infant, and we thrill to the elegance of this demonstration, allowing ourselves to become profoundly impressed by the universality of the “discovery” that “integration of a coherent sense of self is the fundamental issue” of