This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Terrance Brown, MD
Michael Reese Hospital and University of Chicago Wexler Clinic, Room 122 31st Street at Lake Shore Drive Chicago, IL 60616

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44(4):391-392.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Reply.—

Dr Kingsbury's comments on my article¹ are internally contradictory. He begins by rejecting my suggestion that the biologic-psychologic tension current in psychiatry and psychology stems from a confusion of aleatoric and teleonomic frameworks on the grounds that both points of view are represented in each discipline and then presents a hypothesis purportedly explaining why psychiatrists and psychologists think of science in separate ways. His confusion, like Holzman's, stems from not keeping different explanatory frameworks distinct from professional disciplines. Nowhere in my article do I contend that study of psychologic teleonomy is the exclusive province of psychology as a discipline nor that it is the only approach within that discipline. If I equate the psychologic point of view with the teleonomic framework, that should not be interpreted to mean that that point of view is "psychology-as-adiscipline's" exclusive domain. As Kingsbury recognizes, there are both psychiatrists and psychologists (not to . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?