Abstract

The first commentary that we discuss is the quite critical one by Thomas and Long-den. The pertinent question is if the authors’ criticism hits the mark or if it is simply off the mark? We will let the reader decide. In the following, we address some of the most important problems in their commentary. First, Thomas and Longden seem to conflate the concept of pathogenesis with that of etiology. We have presented a phenomenological account of the pathogenesis of some auditory verbal hallucinations in schizophrenia —an account based on empirical data..