Is Multiple Realizability Compatible With Antireductionism?

In a rich and provocative paper, Jaegwon Kim offers an ingenious argument for psychophysical reductionism. I take Kim to be posing a dilemma for anyone who would deny reductionism, viz. that one must either advocate the wholesale reduction of psychology to physical science or one must advocate the sundering of psychology into distinct fields, each one of which is reducible to physical science. Supposedly, the denial of psychophysical reductionism is not an option. My aim is to show that this is not a genuine dilemma. One can reject the wholesale reduction of psychology to physical science without being committed to the view that psychology will undergo numerous domain-specific reductions to physical science.