AbstractAfrer noting some areas of common ground, in particular my acceptance of the fact that causal analysis is not sufficient to capture motivation and meaning, the main disagreement is pinpointed: in my view causal explanations are relevant to human actions. In response to Gergen's contention that cross‐cultural replications have no bearing on theories, which essentially turn on language games, I submit that his account of cross‐cultural work is in several respects misleading. It is suggested that ignoring the striking regularities of social behaviour runs the risk of a return to empty scholastic