[Intersubjectivity: Between Explanation and Understanding].
Revista Colombiana de psiquiatria March 1, 2014 DOI: 10.1016/s0034-7450(14)70043-5 (opens in new tab) via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractThe longstanding division between the natural sciences, which aim at explanation, and the social sciences, which aim at understanding or interpretation, is being challenged by interdisciplinary work on the emergence of the mental within intersubjective relationships. Phenomenology's concept of intersubjectivity as an embodied practice now finds support from cognitive neuroscience and developmental psychology. Authors like J. Bruner and S. Gallagher propose such collaboration as a way to integrate the traditions of explanation and understanding. This paper analyzes how far this collaboration, especially on understanding others and its relevance for psychopathologies, has closed the gap that opened in the nineteenth century between these traditions.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Philosophy of mind |
| Keywords | Comprensión Explanation Explicación Fenomenología Intersubjectivity |
| Key finding | Argues that collaboration between phenomenology and cognitive neuroscience on intersubjectivity may help integrate the traditions of explanation and understanding, but analyzes the extent to which this has closed the historical gap. |
Abstract
The discussion on explanation and understanding has led to a division in the sciences, based on what is considered to be inherent to each of the domains. The task of the natural sciences would be the explanation, while that of the social sciences would be understanding or interpretation.There is a line of work that currently seeks to overcome the methodological dualism and to propose more interdisciplinary studies, such as the studies on emergence of the mental in the framework of intersubjective relationships. In particular, the concept of intersubjectivity defended by the phenomenology as an embodied practice, is being supported by the results of investigations carried out on the basis of the cognitive neuroscience and developmental psychology. Authors from different roots, such as J. Bruner and S. Gallagher propose considering these types of interdisciplinary collaboration as a possible way to integrate the traditions of the explanation and understanding. The purpose of this paper is to analyze to what extent this collaboration between phenomenology and sciences, particularly on the subject of understanding others and their relevance for the understanding of certain psychopathologies, has allowed to close the gap that had opened in the nineteenth century between these traditions.