In the midst of the cognitive revolution there has been a veritable ex plosion of interest in
topics that have been long banished from academic consideration under the intellectual hegemony
of behaviorism. Most notably notions of self ego and identity are reasserting themselves as
fundamental problems in a variety of research traditions within psychol ogy and the social
sciences. Theoretical models review articles edited vol umes and empirical work devoted to
these constructs are proliferating at a dizzying rate. This clearly attests to the renascent
interest in these topics the vitality of these research paradigms and the promise that these
constructs hold for explaining fundamental aspects of human development and behavior. Although
the renewed academic interest in self ego and identity is obviously an exciting and healthy
development there is always the tenden cy for research to take on a parochial character. When
boundaries are erected among different theoretical perspectives when empirical findings are
viewed in isolation when theories are too sharply delimited and segre gated from other domains
of behavior then what may seem like progres sive healthy and content-increasing tendencies
in a research paradigm may turn out to be on closer inspection merely an inchoate thrashing
about. Fortunately there is an internal dynamic to scientific investigation that tends to
combat this degenerating tendency. There is something about the rhythm of science that bids us
to transcend parochial theoretical in terests and seek the most general theory.
