[The author presents variations in the interpretation of so-called "endogenous" psychoses, from the vague notion of "heredodegeneration" to the nosological and axial-syndromic principle and methodologies based on the progression picture, pointing to the increasing importance of the dominant role of biological, psychopathological and social perspectives.
In the models, the author sees relatively valid hypothesis constructs intended to bring together the larger body of knowledge on a topic. Their disadvantage is that their categorical validity is determined solely by their own systematising principle: therefore, models that are too closed are in danger of becoming rigid and dogmatic.
Without claiming to be exhaustive, the author only sketches out the brain topological, constitutive and character typological, descriptive-phenomenological, form-phenomenological, psychoanalytic, existential-anthropological, genetic, cybernetic, and broader biological and sociogenetic models of endogenous psychoses. It highlights the importance of their flexibility, resolvability and synthesizability, without which their clinical usefulness, especially in the context of endogenous psychoses, becomes questionable. ]