ABSTRACT
In common with other CBT therapists, REBT therapists ask clients questions about the empirical status and the pragmatic status of their beliefs. However, we also ask them about the logical status of their beliefs, which other CBT therapists do less frequently. It may be that empirical and pragmatic arguments are more persuasive to clients than logical arguments. We do not know because the relevant research has not been done. Even if this is the case, in general, REBT therapists would still use logical disputing of beliefs for two reasons. First, we do not know on a priori grounds which clients will ®nd which arguments most persuasive in changing their irrational beliefs to their rational alternatives. Just because the majority of clients may ®nd logical arguments unpersuasive, it does not follow that all will do so and to withhold such arguments from those who might ®nd them persuasive would not be good practice. So, REBT therapists tend to use all three arguments to see, as I said above, which arguments will be most persuasive with which clients.
