This paper argues that there is an urgent need to initiate a debate concerning the style of research that is carried in the area of Fish disease. An analysis of the contributions made to the EAFP conference in Rhodes demonstrates that this area research is currently dominated by a reductionist paradigm n lrich implicitly assumes a simple linear causality. Little or no work has been presented to justify this dominance. This paper argues that reductionism is not the only available paradigm that can be employed in designing investigations into disease and that the assumption of different paradigms will result in different research styles or approaches. It is. therefore, argued that there is a need to develop criteria that will allow the comparative evaluation of the products of the various available paradigms. Given our current understanding of the nature of the scientific enterprise we cannot, in evaluating paradigms, appeal to concepts of fact and truth but can only rely on examination of the effectiveness of the various approaches. It is argued that if we are to avoid generating a body of research that is self-referential and largely irrelevant we must initiate a process of critical review of our research programmes.