Human beings are meaning-making creatures, who not only suffer in an immediately felt way, but who can interpret and articulate their discontents through the use of language. The goal of this article is to map different languages of suffering that have been—and still are—in use, when human beings make sense of their problems in living. I argue that our current conception of suffering has been pathologized and biomedicalized with the diagnostic manuals serving as a significant source from which a diagnostic language of suffering emanates. I briefly present four other languages of suffering—religious, existential, moral, and political ones—that are today often delegitimatized by the dominant psychiatric language. Building on pragmatist and hermeneutic philosophies, my goal is to argue that different languages enable different forms of understanding and action, and that we need many different languages in order to fully understand the human condition.