ABSTRACT
The majority opinions seem to lean toward the orthodox position within “normal science” that theory sooner or later leads to “practical” benefits, but with some qualifications and reservations. Typical beliefs of the proponents of this position are that theory and therapy do display a vital reciprocal relationship. Some might object to Otto Fenichel’s claim, citing counterexamples which supposedly demonstrate logical entailment. Otto Kernberg recommends that one focus on the mechanism of splitting, rather than interpreting “directly” each of the alternating expressions of the defense. J. C. Graves discusses and analyzes quite general considerations pertaining to the retroactive rationalizations of scientific theories. K. Campbell has recently examined the approaches which eight major theorists follow in the treatment of borderline disorders. Observation, description, and explanation are three interrelated aspects or functions of theorizing. Diagnosis is a natural byproduct and application of the three interrelated functions of theorizing.
