Tudor, KFeltham, C2025-06-272025-06-272025-03-03Psychotherapy and Politics International, ISSN: 1476-9263 (Print); 1556-9195 (Online), Auckland University of Technology (AUT) Library, 23(1), 1-19. doi: 10.24135/ppi.v23i1.051476-92631556-9195http://hdl.handle.net/10292/19400Following Colin Feltham’s article in this issue (Feltham, 2025), and Keith Tudor’s response (Tudor, 2025b), also published in this issue, the article comprises a series of exchanges between the two authors. It encompasses some discussion—or statements—about beliefs and values; differences of ideology; the use of language; equality and equity; and the nature of psychotherapy. The impetus for the exchange was based on the hope of some rapprochement between the two authors’ views but, in this sense, the project failed. The necessary unfolding of divergent views does not reach any positive conclusions but, at least, airs significant sticking points held by practitioners in the field, about both the content and process of differences, positions, and argument. Nevertheless, and notwithstanding their profound and unresolved differences, both authors hope that, together with the two preceding articles, the whole exchange will stand as a case study regarding conflict about culture and identity in the profession and serve to stimulate further questions.Copyright (c) 2025 Keith Tudor & Colin Feltham. Creative Commons License. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/5203 Clinical and Health Psychology5205 Social and Personality Psychology52 Psychology1103 Clinical Sciences1606 Political Science4408 Political science5203 Clinical and health psychology5205 Social and personality psychologyJournal ArticleOpenAccess10.24135/ppi.v23i1.05