In this paper the following questions are addressed: Is there a consensus about the nature, purpose, and methods of the field? Is the consensus robust enough to be seen as a center likely to hold? What form do the impulses that swirl around this consensus take? Do these impulses tend toward unity or toward fragmentation? Can we assess the implications of such tendencies for the field’s vitality and future prospects? The author reviews tendencies toward convergence and divergence and address the need to fashion a better defined center for the field on foundations of integrated interdisciplinary conceptual and operational frameworks.