Elaborates the meaning of descriptive psychopathology given by the psychiatrist/philosopher Karl Jaspers. Presents phenomena of ‘bizarreness’ often taken to indicate the puzzling condition of schizophrenia. Applies philosophical thought experiments to this phenomena drawing on the work of Louis Sass and John Cutting which press beyond Jaspers’ understanding of schizophrenia. Gives recommendations on the future of psychiatric phenomenology.

A distinction between types of methods (understanding and explanation) that generate different kinds of evidence relevant to the psychiatric assessment is characterised. The distinction is animated with both non-clinical and clinical examples and exercises. Scepticism about the distinction is addressed, and three influential systems of psychiatric knowledge which collapse understanding and explanation in different ways are discussed. The argument is made that the distinction (analogous to the romantic/classic distinction) resurfaces and is compelling. However, another challenge becomes important – holism in psychiatric assessment – which the understanding/explanation distinction leaves in an unsatisfactory state.