There are two ways of thinking in psychiatry-one is biological psychiatry, which is research-oriented and based on the idea that mind is merely a reflection of brain function, and the other is pure psychiatry, which is clinically oriented and focuses not on the brain, but on the mind itself. Current psychiatry is tilted strongly toward the biological perspective and has lost its balance. Arguments in favor of pure psychiatry are not new and are based on the Heidelberg School, a traditional school of psychiatric thought. It postulates that some mental disorders are diseases and others are not. It admits both causal relationships and understandable relationships, and appropriately applies one of them on a case-by-case basis. The Heidelberg School never denies the role of biological psychiatry because it is an important part of pure psychiatry. Biological psychiatry and pure psychiatry provide different viewpoints for each patient. In this presentation, I describe and compare each perspective. From the viewpoint of biological psychiatry, each patient is just one sample from a population of patients with a mental disorder. Conclusions are not drawn by considering an individual patient alone. From the viewpoint of pure psychiatry, every individual is the patient-we try to find something special and unique within them. I also discuss some problems in current psychiatric education that stem from the imbalance of psychiatric thought, and I describe the appropriate direction in which psychiatry should proceed based on the thinking of pure psychiatry.
 Author's abstract