Nursing Theorists Trivia

glasgow3 · Apr 24, 2008

Physics - cosmology if chock full of "unproveable/untestable ramblings of ivory tower inhabitants." Many of these ramblings are interesting and useful.
Economics. Full of folks that describe untestable models. Modern prosperity owes much to their theories
"Alternative Medicine" fields - eg homeopathy, naturopathy, although these theorists may be more readily found in a yurt than an ivory tower.Deepak Chopra and Andrew Weil come to mind. Their work is not without value.
Not everything in life is testable or provable. Also, testing and proving do not automatically equal truth. For example, in the early part of this century scientists tested and proved that white folks are smarter than black folks. "Science" also led to the forced sterilization of "mental defectives" (ie poor people) and remember that Tuskeegee was all about "testing" and "proving."
There is a place for testable hypotheses, however they do not necessarily represent a gold standard of intellectual endeavor.

Ahhhhhhh......so I may conclude from your argument that you believe nursing care is NOT necessarily a place for purely testable hypotheses? .....that the unprovable, the untestable, and the unreproducable may in some way provide a meaningful framework for nursing?

I shall not convince you otherwise for it would be impossible. You do not believe that the scientific method represents the gold standard of intellectual endeavor. Rather, if something appears "interesting" or of "value" to you, then it must be granted equal weight in the marketplace of ideas. I would respectfully disagree.

In my view, nursing academia has placed itself in an untenable position. On the one hand we have evidence-based practice which for many reasons must be recognized by the nursing profession. On the other hand, we have these entrenched mysticisms which many institutions place off limits to challenge...lack of precision or predictability be damned.

Prediction without basis can be entertaining. I myself check the horoscopes on occasion. I predict a successful future for you in nursing as a Therapeutic Touch practitioner. May all of your energy fields remain undisturbed.:heartbeat

llg, PhD, RN · Apr 24, 2008

Ahhhhhhh......so I may conclude from your argument that you believe nursing care is NOT necessarily a place for purely testable hypotheses? .....that the unprovable, the untestable, and the unreproducable may in some way provide a meaningful framework for nursing?
I shall not convince you otherwise for it would be impossible. You do not believe that the scientific method represents the gold standard of intellectual endeavor. Rather, if something appears "interesting" or of "value" to you, then it must be granted equal weight in the marketplace of ideas. I would respectfully disagree.
In my view, nursing academia has placed itself in an untenable position. On the one hand we have evidence-based practice which for many reasons must be recognized by the nursing profession. On the other hand, we have these entrenched mysticisms which many institutions place off limits to challenge...lack of precision or predictability be damned.
Prediction without basis can be entertaining. I myself check the horoscopes on occasion. I predict a successful future for you in nursing as a Therapeutic Touch practitioner. May all of your energy fields remain undisturbed.:heartbeat

Your post quoted above was not in response to one of my posts, but I would like to comment:

I place myself in a "middle ground" on these issues (but not because I am wishy-washy about them, but because it is my purposefully chosen position). I feel strongly that some ideas, theories, etc. are more valid - and more valuable -- than others. I value the opinions of some people more than others. I definitely do NOT give "equal weight" to every idea or theory. I value scientific principles, experimental research designs, etc. very highly. In fact, I have sometimes earned my living doing and teaching scientific research.

However, I also recognize that science is only 1 way to know things -- and that other types of knowing and other methods of inquiry also have their proper place. For example, there is a place for philosophic inquiry in nursing. Scientific methodologies do not produce the answers to ethical questions: nor can science resolve all of our issues in determining our priorities for the development of our profession. ("How do we want the profession to develop?" "What role do we want nurses to play in the health care industry?" etc." Not every question is a scientific one.

I also appreciate aesthetic inquiry and expression. Sometimes, an artistic representation is the best way to illustrate and teach a complex phenomenon. As an extension of that, by examining a phenomenon artistically, one can sometimes "uncover" knowledge about that subject that would not otherwise be discovered. That is a legitimate use of art as a method of inquiry.

So ... I remain open to the possibility that non-scientific approaches can and do make valuable contributions to our knowledge and practice. But that doesn't mean I place equal value on every flakey idea out there.

There is a "middle ground."

czyja, MSN, RN · Apr 24, 2008

Ahhhhhhh......so I may conclude from your argument that you believe nursing care is NOT necessarily a place for purely testable hypotheses? .....that the unprovable, the untestable, and the unreproducable may in some way provide a meaningful framework for nursing?
I shall not convince you otherwise for it would be impossible. You do not believe that the scientific method represents the gold standard of intellectual endeavor. Rather, if something appears "interesting" or of "value" to you, then it must be granted equal weight in the marketplace of ideas. I would respectfully disagree.
In my view, nursing academia has placed itself in an untenable position. On the one hand we have evidence-based practice which for many reasons must be recognized by the nursing profession. On the other hand, we have these entrenched mysticisms which many institutions place off limits to challenge...lack of precision or predictability be damned.
Prediction without basis can be entertaining. I myself check the horoscopes on occasion. I predict a successful future for you in nursing as a Therapeutic Touch practitioner. May all of your energy fields remain undisturbed.:heartbeat

I find your post frustrating. Rather than engage my argument, you mis-characterize my position. I have no beef with science - I worked in a cancer biology lab for five years and my research has been published in a peer reviewed journal. Science is useful. Nursing is a science-based profession. But there is room in the world (and in nursing for more than science).

Where in my argument did I suggest non-science be given "equal weight" to science? An earlier poster suggested that was the only discipline that allows non-science into its realm. My position is that many scientific fields use and profit from non-science.

I predict a successful future for you in nursing as a Therapeutic Touch practitioner. May all of your energy fields remain undisturbed.:heartbeat

Why the sarcasm? Why attempt to mis-characterize me? In fact, I start next month in a critical care/trauma nursing program. Crit care is arguably the most "scientific" of the nursing specialties. As for "energy fields" I do not understand what you mean.

RedCell · Apr 25, 2008

I find your post frustrating. Rather than engage my argument, you mis-characterize my position. I have no beef with science - I worked in a cancer biology lab for five years and my research has been published in a peer reviewed journal. Science is useful. Nursing is a science-based profession. But there is room in the world (and in nursing for more than science).
Where in my argument did I suggest non-science be given "equal weight" to science? An earlier poster suggested that was the only discipline that allows non-science into its realm. My position is that many scientific fields use and profit from non-science.
Why the sarcasm? Why attempt to mis-characterize me? In fact, I start next month in a critical care/trauma nursing program. Crit care is arguably the most "scientific" of the nursing specialties. As for "energy fields" I do not understand what you mean.

I believe Glasgow3 was referring to old lady Martha Rogers' energy field models. As for Virginia Henderson, she is the one who said that nurses do for the patient that which they cannot do for themselves. I also like this "theory" as it most relates to what we do. Also, it is not as whacked out as the rest of the nurse "theorists".

Medicine, theology, and prostitution are some of the oldest professions in the world. I find it somewhat amusing that while they do not attempt to define themselves through theory, nursing believes that it should.

llg, PhD, RN · Apr 25, 2008

Medicine, theology, and prostitution are some of the oldest professions in the world. I find it somewhat amusing that while they do not attempt to define themselves through theory, nursing believes that it should.

I don't know enough about prostitution to say much ... but medicine and theology develop and use theory all the time.

Physicians have based their practice on theories (many of them shown to be wrong when studied more thoroughly). For example, they used to believe that "bleeding the patient" was a way to cure a lot of things. Many physicians refused to believe the "germ theory" of disease for a long time. Throughout history there have been a variety of theories of disease transmission ... the theory that it was harmful to tell the patient the truth about possible bad prognses ... the theory that stomach ulcers were caused by stress alone ... the use of the "clogged plumbing" model to explain heart attacks ... etc.

Theology is also full of theories ... theories of creation ... theories about what happens after death ... theories about God ... theories about all aspects of the universe.

Theories are simply statements of relationships between concepts. Both medicine and theology develop and use theories all the time.

dhames · May 22, 2009

Thanks, one of the better responses I have read.

It is the same idea that just because we have technology [computers] does not mean we will give better nursing care by using it.

Progress is not always good, it just means one person/groups thought pattern is moving forward [progressing].

That thought pattern could be askew, bad, or mediocre. It could be excellent and help nations become better.

D