Dialogical, Graded Forms of Objectivity & Phenomenological Intersubjectivity in Psychiatry

Abstract

This paper examines the question “Is objectivity all in the mind?” by analyzing how knowledge is shaped by subjectivity, scientific practice, and intersubjective dialogue. Drawing from phenomenological philosophy (Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty) and contemporary psychiatry, it argues that pure objectivity cannot exist within the isolated mind as all scientific observations are filtered through cultural assumptions, tools, and expectations. Yet, through intersubjectivity, which is constructed through shared dialogue and critical exchange of perspectives, our collective knowledge can become more robust and practical. This paper thus develops the concept of graded objectivity, proposing that objectivity exists on a spectrum from individual subjectivity to richly validated, intersubjective knowledge. Psychiatric case studies, particularly the diagnosis and treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, illustrate how phenomenological interviewing combined with neuroscientific approaches produces more comprehensive and accurate understanding of these conditions. By situating objectivity as a co-created, dialogical process, this essay offers a middle path between positivism and relativism, demonstrating that objectivity, while not all in the mind of one individual, is collaboratively and gradually achieved across the minds of many.