This discussion paper aims to address the difference between testimony, on the one hand, and observation, judgment, and examination, on the other. Through consideration of a social context, these conceptual frameworks will be compared in terms of their purpose, the knowledge gained when applied to the social world and social beings, as well as the potential implications of their implementation. From the evidence, conclusions will be drawn about whether these conceptual lenses aid in understanding the social world and, consequently, the nature of the human condition. Arthur W. Frank's The Wounded Story Teller and Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish illustrate the opposing situations of testimony and observation, judgment and examination, through which the underlying social assumptions that enable the application of these tools are also exposed. Frank defines the testimony process as taking on “the responsibility to tell what happened. The witness offers testimony to a truth that is generally not recognized or suppressed” (Reference) whereby “the testimony invites his testimony to become what none of us are yet, communicative bodies” (Reference). Interpretatively, to testify is to recognize otherness in its most natural form, communion, through which it is possible to share the experience of emotionally challenging situations in order to lighten the burden of testimony. Michel Foucault as part of his extensive exploration of the disciplinary and punitive system declares that “the success of disciplinary power undoubtedly derives from the use of simple tools; hierarchical observation, normalization of judgment and their combination in a procedure specific to it, examination" (Reference), then...... middle of the sheet ......After considering the testimony on the one hand, and the observation, judgment and examination, on the other hand, in terms of its purpose, the knowledge gained and the implications of its application, it is clear that testimony must be the only tool used for the analysis of human beings and as a framework conceptual for human interaction. Testimony as a conceptual lens provides a foundation that enhances our current understanding of the social world and, in turn, the nature of the human condition through the recognition of otherness. Observation, judgment and examination derive merit from its ability to create a sense of belonging from the process of normalization and judgment by starting to value difference, however it does not help our understanding of the social world due to its corrective purpose which eliminates individuality and internal anomalies to the human condition.