We disagree with Dr. Beitman’s contention that "the schools of therapy are illusory." Common factors are important, patient and therapist factors count, but meaningful differences exist among psychotherapeutic approaches, as any good therapist knows. Although these differences may not always matter, they often may. We agree that all psychotherapeutic treatments involve the power of the interaction, implicitly the transference to authority, unconscious communications, and the wish for relief. Technique in practice is always flexible; for example, every effective psychodynamic treatment involves varied noninterpretive interventions that deepen the process and reveal resistances. Constructs like common factors and patient variables require greater precision and more research. The three psychotherapies our case conference described would not necessarily have yielded identical results. Process research can disentangle the useful from the extraneous in particular therapies, but only within the context of outcome research of defined psychotherapies; i.e., which processes may mediate treatment outcomes. Process research does not currently support the conclusion that no significant differences exist among various psychotherapies. Nor should Dr. Beitman’s letter validate muddy eclecticism. Research may helpfully explore aspects of psychotherapy from neurobiological, process, and outcome vantage points, but it is surely premature to say that we should abandon 55% of our expectations to every patient’s characteristics or that we can yet diagram the neurobiology of countertransference. We join Dr. Beitman in looking forward to the day when such a diagram may be possible.