Pragmatic psychology,as outlined by D. Fishman (1999), serves as the inspiration for this article’s recommendation to integrate the currently opposing factions within offender profiling. These factions have variously been referred to as “inductive/ deductive,” “statistical/clinical,” or “academic/practitioner” approaches. This article outlines how the separation into different factions is both misrepresentative and needlessly divisive and thus undermines the potential contribution of behavioral science to the investigative endeavor. Through a case study, the article illustrates how a pragmatist’s approach would encourage a more productive and synergistic dialogue between the camps. This, in turn, may lead to the creation of a useful and productive archive that would facilitate the professionalization of what has too often seemed an ill-formed forensic discipline. Recent practical and academic concerns have emerged both in the United States (Prentky & Burgess, 2000) and in the United Kingdom (Association of Chief Police Officers [ACPO], 2000) in relation to the type of advice given by a range of individuals claiming some expertise in “offender profiling.” Despite these developments, recent legal concerns (Ormerod, 1999) and concerns over the lack of ethical guidelines for profilers (Alison & Canter, 1999a) suggest that there is an urgent need to formulate detailed ethical, professional, and practical guidelines for both the construction, evaluation, and implementation of psychological advice to police investigations. This article outlines how a proposed synergy of the kind recommended in the therapeutic arena by Fishman (2000) between academics and practitioners may be of direct relevance to the field of profiling. Fishman refers to this synergy as pragmatic psychology, in which he calls for “the development of databases of systematic, rigorous, solution-focused case studies of human service programs of all types” (Fishman, 2000, p. 1). Although still in the embryonic stage, Fishman’s approach has been preceded and influenced by various incarnations of philosophical pragmatism, exemplified in the works of Toulmin (1958), Rorty (1991),