In this paper, we give an outline of the concept of "understanding" in Karl Jaspers and have a rethink on it. His methodology followed the dichotomy of understanding and to explanation in Wilhelm Dilthey. When understanding reaches the limit, it gives way to explanation. Understanding is divided into static one and genetic one.
 In case of static understanding, one transfers the mind into other's inner world to reproduce vividly his experience through "Einfühlung". Einfühlung was translated into English as empathy, which means to share the pathos with other. It is important to notice the opposite direction contained in empathy, through which one perceives other's experience. Empathy precedes the process of understanding. Whereas understanding lacks in actual feeling without empathy, we could empathize other's experience without understanding.
 Genetic understanding aims to grasp how a mental phenomenon arises from another mental phenomenon in a meaningful way. In this case, contrary to Jaspers, it is essential to suspend the personal comprehension putting oneself in other's shoe. Although Jaspers considers explanation as causal thought, the causality emerges when the mind is involved in the process of understanding. We perform the above considerations, taking example in clinical cases of schizophrenia and mood disorder.
 Author's abstract