Held B S
Department of Psychology, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, ME 04011, USA.
J Clin Psychol. 2001 Jan;57(1):53-62. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(200101)57:1<53::aid-jclp7>3.0.co;2-k.
In all of the articles of this special section (Beutler & Harwood, Erwin, Jopling, and Spence), the authors express their commitment to a conventional view of truth and objectivity, a view which serves as a precondition for their commitment to a true science of psychotherapy. In my concluding comments, I first describe the particular focus of each author's concerns about current standards of truth and objectivity in the field. I then anticipate the ways in which their arguments might be challenged by those who now challenge the possibility of truth and objectivity (in any conventional sense) within psychotherapy, or, more broadly, within the human sciences, or, more radically, within the physical sciences.
在本专题的所有文章（博伊特勒与哈伍德、欧文、乔普林和斯彭斯的文章）中，作者们表达了他们对传统真理观和客观性的认同，这种观点是他们致力于真正的心理治疗科学的前提条件。在我的总结评论中，我首先描述每位作者对该领域当前真理和客观性标准的具体关注点。然后，我预测他们的论点可能会受到那些现在质疑心理治疗领域（或更广泛地说，在人文科学领域，或更激进地说，在自然科学领域）中（任何传统意义上的）真理和客观性可能性的人的挑战方式。
