Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the scientific merit of the psychotherapy called Transactional Analysis, developed by Eric Berne in the mid 1960s. ;The investigation uses Stephen Toulmin and Karl Popper as chief critics of this social science system, though the concepts borrowed from them for the critique were originally aimed at the analysis of natural science. ;The first chapter is devoted to an analysis of the chief concepts of Berne's system with emphasis on the philosophical connections with game theory. Much of Berne's work has been criticized for over-extension of terminology and this charge is analyzed with respect to games, strokes, and scripts. ;The second chapter seeks to apply several of Toulmin's notions about science to this particular psychological system. The nature of scientific reasoning as it applies to motive assessment is investigated along with the role models, theories, and descriptions play in interpreting reality. The study concludes that under scrutiny from Toulmin, TA remains viable as a science. ;The third chapter analyzes the system from the viewpoint of Karl Popper, an unfriendly critic of the social sciences. In the course of the analysis, Berne's notion of intuition is investigated to determine whether it measures up to an empiricist critique. It is argued that even under his falsificationalist criterion, TA survives, though some of its main tenets lose some credibility. ;The study closes with a suggestion for the adoption of a contextual epistemology for the social sciences which would emphasize the nature of its human subject matter and design criteria accordingly.