Over time and with supervision, this beginning therapist would gain an awareness of his or her own personal limitations and develop a sense of clinical intuition (and—dare I say it—a "therapeutic self"). To successfully endure in the field, he or she would have to. In this "outside-in" orientation, however, such a therapist would have no language in which to think about these things. Millon’s own statement is illustrative. To compensate for the "incomplete state of the science," as he puts it, "clinicians draw an ill-defined ‘intuitive’ sense. Unfortunately, this intuitive process is an elusive and entirely subjective act that can neither be clearly articulated to others nor examined critically" (p. 126). I would add: not in this outside-in tradition. In my own peer supervision groups, we are constantly attempting to articulate and critically examine our intuition, but we learned therapy in a different way.