FOLLOWING the appearance of Rogers' Counseling and Psychotherapy, numerous articles advocating eclecticism have appeared, largely in protest against the employment of a systematic point of view in interviewing. In attempting to establish the merits of eclectic counseling, these writers have leaned heavily upon certain fundamental premises which are summarized below.I. The use of the appropriate technique at the appropriate moment promises more effective results than rigid adherence to any one method.2. Selection of the appropriate therapy from an &dquo;armament of therapies&dquo; by a skillful worker on the basis of diagnostic and case history techniques gives greater promise of success than systematic counseling.3. No one method is appropriate to the problems of all clients.Although these premises are undeniably sound, it is well to keep in mind the level at which we now deal with the problems of our clients. Diagnosis of emotional, vocational, and educational problems is exceedingly crude. With a relative degree of certainty, diagnoses such as &dquo;alcoholic,&dquo; &dquo;vocational indecision,&dquo; &dquo;behavior problem,&dquo; or &dquo;disturbed&dquo; can be made. Diagnosis at the next level (anxiety neurosis, schizophrenia, etc.) becomes more difficult. Yet only the most naive counselors would assume that such symptomatic diagnostic labels determine the method of treatment to be employed, little less the technique for any given moment. When an attempt is made to determine causal relationships (&dquo;reading problem arising out of parental rejection,&dquo; etc.), the experienced counselor is frequently taxed beyond the limit of his skills. It should be remembered that even at this level of diagnosis the