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
Brown T. Psychiatry and Psychology: The Wall-Reply. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44(4):391–392. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1987.01800160107015
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: