This work points out the main differences in the semantic expressions used by patients with psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) and epileptic seizures (ES). In reference to the body as a phenomenological entity, in ES the concept of the body-object prevails while in PNES the body, with all its life attributes, predominates. In description of seizures and in similitudes and metaphors used, ES patients focus on the description of the attack, trying to close the "gap" with a big effort, while patients with PNES concentrate on the context and on the presence of bystanders. Patients with PNES are unable to describe their own attack, since this it is not at the core of their distress, but rather the manifestation of something else, which is hiding the extreme anguish associated with experiences of the past that cannot be revealed (expressed). In the case of ES, instead, the ability to talk and the willingness to elaborate on the emotions become useful tools for facing the disease, an entity perhaps unsurmountable but at least manageable, to the benefit of everyone. In general, we can say that the experience of a disease (real or symbolic) deserves constant attention because it gives us the opportunity not only to probe the depth of the emotional experiences but also the psychic structure of the individual in front of us. A cure would not be a cure without considering such fundamental elements. It would become a sterile exercise of prescribing medications without paying attention to the person, which is the best way of preserving dignity in a state of illness.