Abstract
Empiricism is a paradoxically fickle mistress. As Hallahan quite accurately points out, there is little opportunity for research to be definitive. It is easier to be unrestrained by facts, to be a polemicist, to advocate a specific, often uncompromising position. However, one's dogmatism may prove detrimental not only to oneself but to the field in general. Careful study can teach us much if only that we do not know what we think. Herein lies the ultimate challenge to the polemicist for whoever presumes to know the solution to all learning disabilities fails to know what he doesn't know. The implications of the limits of research are broader than Hallahan describes: What are the limits of the unrestrained polemicist—more somberly, of the untutored “professional?” If we cannot trust the best empirical techniques available, then what shall we trust? Hallahan's statement requires a very difficult decision; shall we follow him who speaks the loudest and most persuasively, appears the most competent, and has the most to gain from his position? The Intellectual answer is really not open to question; regrettably, our attitudes as we function in the real world are susceptible to such influences.—G. M. S.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.