This article continues, and hopefully concludes, a dispute in this journal over the value of the learning paradigm of problem drinking, as outlined by Heather & Robertson. It is first reasserted that the idea that the problem drinking paradigm is nothing more than a bid by psychologists to take over the alcohol studies field is neither a useful nor serious proposition. Secondly, it is denied that our claim is that psychology has already succeeded in substituting a new paradigm for an old one, but conceded that the term 'general theory' may be more appropriate in some ways than 'paradigm'. Thirdly, the criticism that the general learning theory is as tautologous as the disease theory it aspires to replace is again rejected. Finally, the merits of a general theory of problem drinking, as opposed to a diversity of explanatory models, are expounded.