The Truth in Psychiatry and Neurosciences

  • Juan Ernesto Calderón


Truth is a concept always present in scientific activity, but which is not frequently thematized, due to the fact that the classic definition of truth, ‘adequation of the intellect to the thing’, is still valid with different shades. Martin Heidegger first and Hans Georg Gadamer later sustained that the conception of truth as the correspondence or adequation of the intellect to the thing was established in a germinal of the Western thought, specifically in Plato’s work. This definition of truth replaces the original meaning of the Greek word a-letheia, meaning ‘unconcealment’. This article states that another conception of truth is in force, which can be useful in scientific research and practice. In particular, (1) this paper will analyse a definition of truth as ‘unconcealment’ introduced by Phenomenology and Philosophical Hermeneutics; and (2) it will also demonstrate the usefulness of this notion in the field of Psychiatry and Neuroscience. For these purposes, this paper will deal in the first place, with the problem of method and understanding in Hermeneutics and the rigour which scientific knowledge can reach. Then, the notion of truth according to the hermeneutic conception will be developed. Finally, the impact of this difference in the conception of truth for scientific practice will be analysed, placing special emphasis on Neurosciences and Psychiatry.


Truth Adequation Unconcealment Phenomenology Hermeneutics Psychiatry Neurosciences 


  1. 1.
    Gadamer H-G. Was is Wahrheit? In: Gesammelte Werke, Band I. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr; [1957] 1986. p. 46–58.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gadamer H-G. Sprache und Verstehen. In: Gesammelte Werke, Band VI. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr; [1970] 1986. p. 94–108.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heidegger M. Being and time. New York: State University of New York Press; 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gadamer H-G. Truth and method. New York: Sheed & Ward Ltd and the Continuum Publishing Group; 2006.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gadamer H-G. Vom Zirkel des Verstehens. In: Gesammelte Werke, Band VI. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr; [1959] 1986. p. 54–61.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Künne W. Conceptions of Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glanzberg M. Truth. In: Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Winter 2016 Edition, [On-line encyclopedia]. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Accessed 4 Mar 2017.
  8. 8.
    David M. The correspondence theory of truth. In: Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Fall 2012 Edition, [On-line encyclopedia]. Accessed 12 Mar 2017.
  9. 9.
    Wittgenstein L. Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell; 1953.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heidegger M. Plato’s doctrine of truth. In: Burret W, Ken HDA, editors. Philosophy of the twenty century. An anthology. New York: Random House; 1962. p. 251–70.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Plato. The republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company; 1992.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nietzsche F. The will to power. New York: Vintage Books Edition; 1968.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Husserl E. Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy; second book: studies in the phenomenology of constitution. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher; 2000.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Husserl E. The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press; 1970.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Borges JL. Del rigor en la ciencia. Accessed 3 Mar 2017.
  17. 17.
    Roetti J. Las formas de la ciencia y la metafísica. In: Milone R, editor. Ciencia y Metafísica. Mendoza: UN de Cuyo, Mendoza; 2012. p. 7–17.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Prinz J. The emotional construction of morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schroeder T. Three faces of desire. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goldman A. Simulating minds: the philosophy, phycology, and neuroscience of mindreading. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Flanagan O. Neuro-eudaimonics, or Buddhists lead neuroscientists to the seat of happiness. In: Bickle J, editor. The Oxford handbook of philosophy and neuroscience. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009. p. 582–600.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roskies A. What’s ‘Neu’ in neuroethics? In: Bickle J, editor. The Oxford handbook of philosophy and neuroscience. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009. p. 454–72.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    McNally R. Is the pseudoscience concept useful for clinical psychology? The Sci Rev Ment Health Pract. 2003;2. Accessed 6 Mar 2017.
  24. 24.
    Cooper R. Is psychiatric research scientific? In: Matthew B, Bortolotti L, editors. Psychiatry as cognitive neuroscience: philosophical perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pickestone J. Ways of knowing. Manchester: Manchester University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gadamer H-G. Replik zu Hermeneutik und Ideologiekritik. In: Gesammelte Werke, Band VI. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr; [1971] 1986. p. 118–41.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tobías Imbernón C, García-Valdecasas Campelo J. Humanistic-existential psychotherapies: philosophical and methodological foundations. Rev Asoc Esp Neuropsiq. 2009;XXIX(104):437–53.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Svenaeus F. Hermeneutics of medicine in the wake of Gadamer: the issue of phronesis. Theor Med. 2003;24:407–31.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bickle J, Mandik P, Landreth A. The philosophy of neuroscience. In: Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Summer 2012 Edition [On-line encyclopedia]. Accessed 20 Feb 2017.
  30. 30.
    Lloyd D. Functional MRI and the study of human consciousness. J Cogn Neurosci. 2002;14:818–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lloyd D. Radiant cool: a novel theory of consciousness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Grush R. The semantic challenge to computational neuroscience. In: Machamer P, Grush R, McLaughlin P, editors. Theory and method in the neurosciences. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press; 2001. p. 155–72.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan Ernesto Calderón
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy and LiteratureNational University of Cuyo, Centro UniversitarioMendozaArgentina

Personalised recommendations