This article seeks to contribute to a greater dialogue between Adlerian and constructivist psychotherapies by discussing (a) the many similarities between Adlerian and constructivist camps in terms of philosophical, theoretical, and practical considerations, (b) some unique features of individual psychology that may augment specific approaches in constructivist psychotherapy, (c) some of the unique features of constructivism that Adlerians may find enriching to their approach, and, (d) how this integrative dialogue may relate to the contemporary context of theoretical integration.

In this study, Bartholomew’s (1990) four-category model of attachment (secure, preoccupied, dismissing, and fearful) was used to test Guidano’s (1987) notion that the personal cognitive organization (P.C. Org.) of individuals with eating disorders is characterized by an enmeshed, preoccupied working model of attachment. Consistent with this characterization, Bartholomew’s preoccupied and secure attachment dimensions were found to significantly discriminate a clinical eating disorder sample (n = 17) from normal subjects (n = 27).

Despite their range of reactions, the rejoinders to Lyddon and Weill’s article (in this issue) converge on two fundamental issues facing cognitive psychotherapists in the postmodern era: (1) the relation between human knowing and reality and (2) contrasting constructions of the self. In this article I critically evaluate the various rejoinders with respect to these issues. I also suggest that recent developments in the cognitive sciences parallel the postmodern shift away from modernist dualisms and dichotomies toward a more complex and integrative view of psychological phenomena.

Implications of postmodern thought for the theory and practice of cognitive psychotherapy are examined in light of three postmodern influences—social constructionism, feminism, and multiculturalism. It is suggested that these influences challenge cognitive psychotherapists to (a) develop a greater appreciation for the ways in which human realities are socially negotiated, (b) provide more contextualized accounts of psychological problems, particularly with regard to the dimensions of gender, culture, and economic class, and (c) incorporate client empowerment strategies into their models of change.