SEPI

Announcements by SEPI Members

FINDING LEGITIMACY FOR CASE STUDY KNOWLEDGE

Posted By: Dan Fishman
Date: Wednesday, 18 October 2006, at 12:14 p.m.

PRAGMATIC CASE STUDIES IN PSYCHOTHERAPY

http://pcsp.libraries.rutgers.edu

*** a peer-reviewed, multi-theoretical, freely available e-journal of systematic case studies & case study method articles ***

From Dan Fishman, Editor --

Announcing publication of a new, case method series of articles:

“FINDING LEGITIMACY FOR CASE STUDY KNOWLEDGE:

A TRIALOGUE IN 4 ROUNDS,” with articles by Barbara Held, Daniel Fishman, and Ronald B. Miller.

*** Editor’s note: With renewed interest in and support of the scholarly, theoretical, practical, and clinical value of case study knowledge (as illustrated in a wealth of recent writings reflecting a wide diversity of conceptual perspectives), questions have arisen as to the proper epistemology for philosophically grounding such knowledge. For example, how scientifically objective is case-based knowledge, how generalizable is it, and can it validly uncover causal mechanisms? And what are the implications for these questions when a psychological intervention project like psychotherapy is viewed as an intrinsically moral enterprise focusing on human agency, moral choice, and the alleviation of suffering? The present series of articles by Barbara Held, Ronald B. Miller, and myself offers different perspectives on these issues in the form of a trialogue.

*** Louis Sass, President of the Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology (Division 24 of the American Psychological Association), had the opportunity to review pre-publication versions of the articles and wanted to share this reaction:

“Clearly, the issues being debated here are fundamental to clinical psychology (and the human or social sciences more generally), and unlikely to be settled with any knock-out punch (as Fishman’s final title implicitly acknowledges). The authors focus considerable attention on the specific issue of case-study method, but they treat more general issues pertaining to the epistemology of the social sciences. The question of the nature of objectivity, truth, and causality, of the role of moral judgment and phronesis [practical wisdom], etc. etc., are all debated at a high level of sophistication. Each of the authors manages to present his or her position with maximum clarity, and each demonstrates a profound knowledge of relevant publications not only in psychology but also in philosophy. Each of the authors makes a sincere attempt not simply to repeat his or her favored perspective, but to give careful consideration to the opposing position and to offer a response that furthers the dialogue. Ortega y Gasset somewhere says ‘In philosophy, clarity is courtesy.’ In my mind, this series certainly lives up to both of the twin ideals implied in Ortega’s statement.”

***** The Articles *****

FINDING LEGITIMACY FOR CASE STUDY KNOWLEDGE:

INTRODUCTION TO A TRIALOGUE IN 4 ROUNDS (Fishman)

ROUND 1: DOES CASE STUDY KNOWLEDGE NEED A NEW EPISTEMOLOGY? (Held)

ROUND 2A: FINDING OBJECTIVITY AND CAUSALITY IN PRAGMATISM – A RESPONSE TO HELD (Fishman)

ROUND 2B: FACING HUMAN SUFFERING -- A RESPONSE TO HELD

(Miller)

ROUND 3: REGARDING OBJECTIVITY AND CAUSALITY –

A REJOINDER TO FISHMAN AND MILLER (Held)

ROUND 4A: NOT A KNOCK-OUT PUNCH, BUT RATHER A CALL FOR PLURALISM – A FURTHER REPLY TO HELD (Fishman)

ROUND 4B: HOW REAL IS CLINICAL WISDOM? A FURTHER REPLY TO HELD (Miller)