2013/05/20 by Tsutomu Kumazaki
Arts and Humanities · Psychology · #Hermeneutics and Narrative Identity #Mental Health and Psychiatry #Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy
paper · doi:10.1177/0957154x13476201
openalex publication_date 2013/05/20 · openalex created_date 2016/06/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
The present paper investigates the methodology involved in Jaspers' psychopathology and compares it with Husserl's phenomenology and with Dilthey's cultural science. Allgemeine Psychopathologie and other methodological works by Jaspers, the works of Husserl and Dilthey that Jaspers cited, and previous research papers on Jaspers are reviewed. Jaspers had conflicting views on understanding, which were comprised of both empathic understanding and rational, ideal-typical understanding. Such a standpoint on understanding is considerably different from Dilthey's. Additionally, the present paper reconfirms that Jaspers' 'phenomenology' as a form of descriptive psychology for the understanding of empirical psychic states is different from Husserl's phenomenology. Thus, this paper casts doubt on the common opinion that Jaspers was under the profound influence of Husserl or Dilthey.