Abstract
Competing urges to think of human mental suffering as comprehensible and susceptible to scientific formulation, or as deeply complex and beyond the reach of scientific analysis, have torn at the fabric of psychiatry for many years and have left the field conceptually divided between science and humanism. Conceptual reparation of psychiatry is now a core mission of a field that is trying to heal itself so that it is equipped to heal the patients it serves. To formulate their cases comprehensively and provide patients with cutting-edge care, psychiatrists must heal the conceptual wounds that have resulted from dividing the human individual into an object of scientific scrutiny and a subject of personal experience. They must synthesize science and humanism in order to generate new understanding of mental disorders and to train future clinicians and researchers. Principles of classical American pragmatism, I argue in this article, can help to transcend the science/humanism divide in psychiatry. Clinical pragmatism focuses on favorable treatment outcomes by respecting the practical, pluralistic, participatory, and provisional aspects of psychiatric care. It demands that psychiatrists have the skill and flexibility to use multiple explanatory concepts in a collaborative, open-ended process with their patients. These themes are explored from the perspectives of contemporary psychiatric treatment, training, and research.