Clinical Theory and Scientism

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The standard Truax-Carkhuff method of assessing therapist empathy has long been criticized as lacking construct validity. However, the criticisms have been made from within the same positivist philosophy of science that is itself responsible for the conventional assessment method. In consequence, such criticisms fail even to identify the real problems involved in assessing therapist empathy, and are likewise unable to offer positive suggestions to improve a method that is demonstrably ineffective. It is argued that the background doctrines of operationism and empiricism are themselves the main obstacles to meaningful study. The manner in which research methods guided by these doctrines hopelessly distort the subject area is analyzed. Finally, therapist-empathy research is shown to be assimilable to a general science of meaning.