The epistemological status of psychoanalysis has become the object of heated debate in recent years as the evidential basis for its clinical theories and procedures has been increasingly questioned. Objectivists view psychoanalysis as a natural science that can be tested by the same objective methods as any other natural science. On the other side, the advocates of relativism contend that psychoanalytic truths are relative to the situation and standpoint of the observer. It is the contention of the present paper that neither side of this argument recognizes the unique nature of psychoanalytic knowledge, and, therefore, neither position provides an epistemological basis for psychoanalysis. Both the objectivist and relativist viewpoints will be examined in detail to illustrate the fundamental flaws in each position. It will be argued that only a specifically human science standpoint avoids the unresolvable problems of the other two positions and provides a valid epistemological basis for psychoanalytic science.