The construction of the phenomenological project of psychopathology began in the 1920s. Husserl’s philosophical elaborations, which started to be drawn a few decades earlier, had a broad repercussion on the historical and cultural context of the time and was eventually incorporated into several disciplines, including psychopathology. Particularly in this field, phenomenology had a significant impact, because its epistemological foundations was a close match to the rigorous purposes of a scientific investigation of mental disorders.The phenomenological contribution has established an irrevocable and (...) unique conception of the psychiatric object. The innovation brought... (shrink)

This article develops a phenomenological contribution to biological psychiatry. Grounded in the principles of transformation, heterogeneity, proportionality and particularity, a paradigm of phenomenological orientation allocates to biology a role different from that assumed by official Cartesian psychiatry. First, no clear definition of what is biological may be established a priori—as a general application, and useful to each and every studied phenomenon. Biology may be understood only as the experience of ununderstandable elements within consciousness, and as belonging necessarily to a whole (...) unity of conscious experience. Second, the research agenda in biological psychiatry necessarily intersects with the investigation of the particularities of each individual clinical case with its unique characteristics. Without this, the very notion of biological psychiatry becomes merely a theoretical abstraction. Finally, the continuity of the biological agenda needs to resume the construction and investigation of psychopathological categories that cohere with the reality of the mental universe. (shrink)

Critical-philosophical commentary on theses defended in scientific articles may be guided by two distinct perspectives, each leading to inquiries and styles of responses that are both distinct and complementary: an internal perspective and an external perspective. The internal commentator belongs to the same epistemological field of the authors and, as such, shares the same categorical assumptions and the same Weltanschauung explored in the text. The dialogue with this commentator emphasizes the minutiae of the observation of the shared scientific reality and (...) points out the frontiers toward which the discussion of a scientific branch must advance. The external commentator, in contrast, emphasizes the categorical... (shrink)