A contentious debate between the modern and postmodern epistemologies continue to wage on since the rise of constructivism and social constructionism in the 1990s. This debate has led to both modern and postmodernists falling into an either/or mindset. Others have proposed a solution, the both-and approach, that emphasizes integration of different therapeutic camps. Intentionality is a core component of this approach, as therapists must understand how employed interventions flow from the epistemology and theoretical orientation under which they operate. Another core component of this approach is tailoring the integration to the specific context of the client case. With this understanding and tailoring, therapists can utilize methods across the modern/postmodern divide, as they will coherently flow from their original epistemology and theoretical orientation. Applying methods from both modernism and postmodernism, then, enhances therapists’ therapeutic repertoire, allowing for more opportunities to adapt treatment to each client case. Altogether, the quality of services improve and the amount of clients therapists can help increases as well. This paper will provide an application of the both-and approach to a case study to provide an example of how the said method can be employed in therapy.

自1990年代建构主义和社会建构主义兴起以来，现代和后现代认识论之间的争论一直在继续。这场辩论导致现代主义者和后现代主义者陷入一种或有或没有的心态。其他人则提出了一种解决方案，即“兼并”方法，该解决方案强调了不同治疗阵营的整合。意向性是该方法的核心组成部分，因为治疗师必须了解所采用的干预措施是如何从其认识论和理论取向出发的。这种方法的另一个核心组件是根据客户案例的特定上下文量身定制集成。通过这种理解和调整，治疗师可以利用跨越现代/后现代鸿沟的方法，因为它们将源于其原始的认识论和理论取向。然后，运用现代主义和后现代主义的方法，可以增强治疗师的治疗方法，从而为适应每个个案提供更多的机会。总体而言，服务质量得到了改善，客户治疗师的数量也可以帮助增加。本文将为案例研究提供“双向”方法的应用，以提供该方法如何在治疗中使用的示例。