This article presents the author's response to "Excessive Positivism in Person-Centered Planning," by Steve Holburn and Christine D. Cea. The author begins by complementing Holburn and Cea on their courage to voice concerns that perhaps may not appear to be politically correct or perhaps too bold to express in the context of a journal like "Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities" (RPSD). As "person-centered planning (PCP) insiders," however, Holburn and Cea offer these concerns respectfully and in hopes of improving structures and supports to sustain and to evaluate PCP implementation over the long haul. The author commends Holburn and Cea on their overall assessment or conclusion that the issues associated with excessive positivism are "a misapplication of PCP principles rather than an inherent flaw in the design of the approach." He responds to this overall conclusion prior to reacting to each of Holburn and Cea's four subpoints, that extreme positivism can lead to (1) unrealistic goals; (2) viewing failures as success; (3) ignoring dissenting perspectives; and (4) contamination of PCP evaluation efforts.