Psychoanalysis has had two contending perspectives on how to most effectively enhance its theoretical and clinical knowledge base: the traditional intensive case study method innovated by Freud (dubbed qualitative research) and the later developed formal empirical research in accord with the usual canons of objective, natural science (quantitative research). An article by Irwin Hoffman (2009), arguing that objective empirical research should not be privileged over traditional subjective intensive case study as an avenue to psychoanalytic knowledge increase, has aroused multiple responses, pro and con, by psychoanalytic clinicians and researchers. This article assesses four of those responses.