Beyond and on the side of orthodox client-centeredness - on balancing the conceptual framework of PCT

Rogers' intention in calling his method client-centered therapy was to emphasize a 'counter-centeredness' to the approaches and methods which he felt to be therapist-centered. But what does this counter-centeredness consist of and how radical can it be without becoming trapped in contradictions or problematic biases? Do we pay too little attention to the implications of our theory of psychopathology in discussions of the conceptual framework of person-centered therapy? Is empathic understanding also a form of interpretation? Is the use of diagnoses to be rejected unequivocally or are there situations in which diagnoses are helpful even in Person-Centered Therapy (PCT)? Can we justify the need for defining modes of intervention, i.e. a 'therapeutic technique', in person-centered therapy? These questions will be examined by reflecting on certain positions regarding therapeutic theory.