When considering the human movement from a restricted point of view (i.e. from only one field of study), its complexity is evident at each new step in Science. Considering such complexity in the human movement, we revisit the possibility of a dialogue between Philosophy and Science, focusing on the studies on the human body and movement. We invoke the strangeness between Neuroscience and Philosophy, especially the phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty with clinical examples and reflexions. The intention is not to find a system of explanations, to force an approximation or to point out elements for hierarchization, but to extract elements that help us to think about our certanties and doubts about the human movement. Philosophy can restate questions and restore the place of doubt, when initially, it helps us to enquire assumptions and consequences of our research. On the other hand, Science opens fields, stimulates curiosity and allows questioning even without one recognizing it. The difference between the ways of thinking reality and knowledge does not need to be fought at the costs of weakening both. However, it is possible to extract interesting consequences from an approximation between Philosophy and Science.
Neuroscience; Phenomenology; Research; Human movement