Precedents and Professors—The Struggle Over Common Ground

Abstract

If I understand the outlook of Professors Baker, Robinson, and Weimer correctly, all three are either proteleology or at least willing to look at this possibility in psychological theorizing. They just do not care for what I am doing in this regard. I had asked the editors of this journal to seek comments from colleagues on the other side of the question, hoping to engage them in debate that might have some influence on the thinking of my opponents, as well as on my own. As one oriented to dialectical human reasoning, I believe that much is to be gained from such oppositional exchanges (see, e.g., Rychlak, 1972). Apparently, we were unable to draw the other side into such discussion. But never mind: I am up to my neck in debate with my own kind. My present critics have found my ideas and empirical tests seriously wanting. My presentation also seems to have led to misunderstandings. I hope that my own shortcomings will not prejudice the reader against further consideration of telic explanation in human behavior. I thank my critical colleagues for taking the time to read my paper and to comment as they have done. I hope that this opportunity for a rejoinder will reassure the reader that my scholarship and my way of reaching for the telic human image are not so deficient as my colleagues make them out to be.