Response to Kim’s Human Living Concept as a Unifying Perspective for Nursing

Abstract

Aswebeginthefutureofanewcentury, we are also beginning to design our professional history for that era. Certainly, we can simply choose to continue on the course carved out by the past. Or, we can decide to change direction and pursue different alternatives that lead to conditions of the possible, as yet limited only by our capacity to imagine them. In her thoughtful discussion of our progress to this point, Hesook Suzie Kim describes nursing's scientific quest as yielding multiple theories, conflicting research findings, and competing approaches to patient care. Such diversity can be interpreted as evidence of conceptual confusion that perpetuates dissonance, characterized by Kim as a schism between nursing science and practice. Or, it can be perceived as a conceptual kaleidoscope of an evolving science that acknowledges an epistemic distinction between knowledge generation and knowledge in use. From the latter perspective, apparent dissonance is refor

Accounts of School Nursing

“…The difficulties to do so are on the ontological and epistemological levels. The concept of `human living` reflects a pluralistic perspective, with influence of medicine to focus on human needs (10). In this paper the typology is used for only practical reasons, to structure the research problem and findings as a way to naming them.…”

“…The springboard for this study is based on Kim´s (1) (p. 43) statement: «Nursing is a service to people for the promotion of health». This statement is an aspect of Kim`s `human living` concept (10). Kim (1) also identifies a nursing's conceptual framework for nursing that focuses on human needs and presents a typology of theoretical domains to understand the different phenomena in nursing.…”

Jamesian pragmatism: a framework for working towards unified diversity in nursing knowledge development

“…The sources that specifically reference pragmatist literature indeed fall into the above categories. Examples include Rawnsley (2000), who discusses how pluralist nursing research has ‘found a renewed vigor through . .…”

“…In its pluralism, pragmatism has been described as edifying (Crist et al. , 2009), democratic (Rawnsley, 2000), and inclusive (Murphy, 1990; Talisse & Aikin, 2008), all of which should sway some consideration of its applicability to this issue. I will continue to follow along with Bernstein's concept of engaged pluralistic fallibilism in my discussion of James's tenets of fallibilism and the instrumentalities of truths in application to nursing knowledge development.…”

“…In this, truth informs and revises practice, and vice versa (James, 1907/1981, 1909/1975; Talisse & Aikin, 2008). In nursing, the theory–practice link is central to providing optimal nursing care, and, similar to the pragmatic ideology stated above, nursing research and practice should be interconnected and iterative, each informing and revising the other (Rawnsley, 2000; Doane & Varcoe, 2005). However, if a theory–practice gap exists there is a problem in this research–practice relationship.…”