Eureka! (and other cliches) In Search of Meaning: A Psychotherapy of Small Steps. N. Peseschkian. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1985. (201 pp.) In the third chapter of this book there is a section titled "What Is This Book Leading Up To?" The author begins his answer to this question as follows: As we have seen, the answer to the question depends to a great extent on the assumptions under which the question is asked. This is especially true for a book which, with its questions of meaning, does not stand apart from the problem, but rather right in the middle of it. In the world there are a great number of people-I'd like to believe it's a majority-who advocate world peace, and who believe it to be the only way to solve the human question of meaning (p. 22). If this answer strikes you as vague, or leaves you feeling like you must have missed some important piece of information from a previous section of the book that I have neglected to quote for you, then In Search of Meaning is probably not a book for you. It is not a book that follows a direct path, that makes a systematic argument, or even that broadly discusses a general theme. It is a book that shuns analysis, ignores laboratory findings, and avoids the direct expression of ideas. It is a discussion that is built on the bases of rhetoric and an intuitive or "commonsense" appeal to the reader; the claims that are made are substantiated with anecdotes and a journalistic rendering of facts. From the book's title, I had inferred that it would be about the experience of "meaninglessness," about psychotherapy, and about the provision of psychotherapy for people who experience life as meaningless. I was wrong. Yes, the author does refer to the meaning of this and that and has something to say about the psychotherapy of just about everything. But the book is not about these things; rather, it is about the certitude that comes with faith. It is a religious apologetic. According to Peseschkian, "Religion and worldview are what give meaning to life. Faith in them gives individual human beings and societies the reference system within which they learn to comprehend themselves" (p. 192). In identifying religion as the source of meaning, he is not recommending religion to people willy-nilly, not suggesting that therapists escort their clients to the nearest synagogue, cathedral, or shaman's hut. To the contrary, he attempts to provide by means of his "positive psychotherapy" a core of constructs and techniques that will do the job more effectively. Is this to say that the task of positive psychotherapy is to do religion's job for it? Not quite. Psychotherapy is no substitute for religion, the author admits, but if a psychotherapy is grounded in religious principles and a religious understanding of human persons and the world, then psychotherapy will be consistent with religious purposes. Positive psychotherapy is a therapy grounded in religious principles, specifically, the principles of the Baha'i faith. Its therapeutic aims, like its views of the human person, are derived from the Baha'i understanding of what a person should and/or can be. …