You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Leo Rangell (2006), in his article on the evolution of psychoanalytic theory, indicates where he feels that I have a differing view, both of present circumstances and of projected directions. Our perspectives do indeed differ, but I feel that his presentation seriously misunderstands and misrepresents my views. I do not feel, as he contends, that all theoretical perspectives have “equal valence and validity.” Rather, I have stated that they all claim complete explanatory comprehensiveness on a theoretical level and at least comparable effectiveness on a clinical level, and I feel that we have no scientific warrant at this time for claiming the established greater validity of any one approach over the others. This is not to say that all do have “equal valence and validity.” Rangell feels that his preferred approach, which he calls “total composite psychoanalytic theory,” is superior (more encompassing and more correct) to the others. I feel that we cannot make judgments about validity at this point in the evolving development of our discipline.