Both proponents and opponents of the claim that mental disorders are natural kinds compare mental disorders to paradigmatic examples of natural kinds, to inquire into a set of properties that achieve three scientific tasks: explanation, prediction, and intervention. I argue that the comparative strategy fails to take us to any intervention-related properties of mental disorders. I replace it with what I call a trilateral strategy-a strategy guided by first-person accounts of individuals with mental disorders, and the relevant clinical and scientific work on psychopathology. I illustrate how the trilateral strategy works with a focus on schizophrenia-an example used by both sides of the debate.