Szasz continues his inquiry into the problems of analysis, this time as it relates to training. He considers the relationship of analysis to medicine and to nonmedical psychotherapy, the psychoanalytic pledge, and the training analysis. He takes issue with some official and popular stands of the American Psychoanalytic Association, and raises questions, as he has before, about the correctness of labeling analysis as medical treatment. He attacks the advisability of the pledge candidates have to sign, promising not to conduct analysis or represent themselves as analysts until so authorized, on the basis that it constitutes an unwarranted authoritarian means for obtaining a desirable goal. The most meaty section of the article involves Szasz's questioning of the efficacy of training analyses. He makes a good case for a division of labor, the training analyst analyzing and the teachers and supervisors alone passing judgment on the qualification of the candidate.