ABSTRACT It is highlighted that the application of general system theory (GST) – including the developments from the intrapsychic to interpsychic and the lineal to nonlineal perspective – to the family, consolidated the field of family therapy, itself. A limitation, however, was the excessive emphasis on the system as self-regulating; this emphasis also obscuring a sine qua non of this approach, namely, observation of interaction. Accordingly, it is recommended that an earlier name – one accentuating interaction and circumventing emphasis on self-regulation – the “interactional” approach, be retained as a more suitable designation of this approach. This development was followed by narrative therapy. In applying the narrative metaphor, though, narrative therapy incurs an error of logical typing by confusing: (a) the observer’s frame of reference (i.e., observing is subjective); with (b) inferences about another’s frame of reference (i.e., the intrapsychic perspective). This, with an unsubstantiated claim that the narrative metaphor is preferable to the system one, resulted in the developments of the intrapsychic to interpsychic perspective and the interactional approach being unnecessarily discarded. The interactional approach thus serves an extraordinary development; observing psychopathology as a communicational or interactional difficulty. Returning to narrative therapy, its emphasis – as an application of postmodernism – on the frame of reference constitutes an extremely significant contribution. Furthermore, its attention to meaning and interpretation reemphasizes the significance of the intrapsychic perspective. Also, narrative therapy’s sensitivity to the client represents a profound reemphasis of the significance of a humanistic, person-centered approach. Having refigured these developments, the paper concludes with reflections about a truly integrative approach.

中文翻译：

---

走向综合方法：重新定义家庭治疗的基本发展

摘要 需要强调的是，一般系统理论 (GST) 的应用——包括从内部心理到心理间以及从线性到非线性视角的发展——在家庭中的应用，巩固了家庭治疗领域本身。然而，一个限制是过分强调该系统是自我调节的。这种强调也掩盖了这种方法的一个必要条件，即观察相互作用。因此，建议保留一个较早的名称——一个强调互动并绕过对自我调节的强调——“互动”方法，作为这种方法的更合适的名称。这种发展之后是叙事治疗。然而，在应用叙事隐喻时，叙事治疗会通过混淆以下内容而导致逻辑类型错误：（a）观察者的参考框架（i. e.，观察是主观的）；(b) 对他人参照系的推论（即内心视角）。这种未经证实的声称叙事隐喻比系统隐喻更可取，导致心灵内部视角向心灵间视角的发展以及交互方法被不必要地丢弃。因此，交互方法服务于非凡的发展；将精神病理学视为交流或互动困难。回到叙事疗法，它强调——作为后现代主义的一种应用——对参考框架构成了极其重要的贡献。此外，它对意义和解释的关注再次强调了内在视角的重要性。还，叙事疗法对来访者的敏感性代表了对人文主义、以人为本的方法的重要性的深刻重新强调。在重新描述了这些发展之后，本文最后反思了一种真正的集成方法。