ABSTRACT
Many different classifications regarding counterpara-doxical interventions currently exist. Haley (1963) and more recently Seltzer (1986) examine paradox from the perspective of the different approaches in which it is utilized. The extensive and noted work of Weeks and L'Abate (1982) offers yet another review that distin-guishes paradoxes on the basis of level (individual, interactional, systemic) at which they act or, as in the study of Rohrbaugh, Tennen, Press, and White (1981), on a compliance/defiance model. We propose a view based on the structure of counterparadox; we maintain that while counterparadoxical interventions are established on the same principles, they differ most in their formal aspects.
