She reasons that the subjective nature of constructivist therapy disallows the knower from coming to any conclusions that are founded on an independent, objective reality. In her analysis of this alternative method of psychotherapy, Held takes a straightforward, logical approach that leads her to conclude that constructivism is not an acceptable, standardized means of therapy. She walks the reader through the distinctions between realism and antirealism, the consequences of yielding to subjective therapy, and evidence that such therapy does appeal to antirealist doctrine. However, she oversimplifies the true essence of contructivist psychotherapy. By reducing it to the absurd she does not give a full view of the complexity that is involved in this relatively new therapy.
Modern psychology branches out into a variety of therapeutic approaches.
Therapists of these schools of thought maintain that there is an outside, objective reality that can be used as a reference point, or standard, in measuring their clients internal world. It is certainly reasonable to assume that purely objective measures would benefit any means of personal evaluation. Within the past twenty years, however, a new approach in psychotherapy has gained precedence among the shadows of traditional cognitive therapy. The constructivist viewpoint carries with it a certain degree of subjectivity in that it emphasizes the self-organizing features of knowing and operates on the principle that human knowledge is interpersonal and evolutionary. It should be remembered that constructivism is more a philosophy than a set of therapeutic guidelines.