Question: Comment 1: The aspect that I found most interesting in the reading is the polarity between the older and the newer nursing theories. The older nursing theories are associated with taxonomies and quantitative measures, whereas the newer more holistic nursing theories are more qualitative measures and softer phenomena (Shelly, J., 2006). The revolution in the approach of how we think about nursing and nursing interventions in association to ethical decision making relates to a belief that nursing as a profession is both a science and an art-based profession, and the the new theories expand upon the concept. The other aspect that is interesting to me is using world views to challenge contemporary ethos by using philosophical clarity, religious sensitivity, and proportionate level of care for the sick and others who may need other forms of physiological and psychological interventions and/or wellbeing.
As medicine is traditionally considered a healing profession, and modern medicine claims legitimacy to heal through its scientific approach to medicine (Starr, P., 1982), the marriage of science and medicine has generally empowered nurses and physicians to intervene actively in the course of disease, to effect cures, to prevent illness, and to eradicate disease Hauerwas, S. (1990). In the wake of such success, nurses and physicians trained as biomedical scientists, have focused on the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease. In the process, cure, not care, became the primary purpose of medicine; as nurses and physician's role have transformed to the "curer of disease" rather than "healer of the sick (Starr, P. (1982). Thus, healing in a holistic sense has faded from medical attention and is rarely discussed in the medical literature.
Comment 2: The polarity between the older and newer nursing theories is the aspect which I have found to be the most interesting during my reading. From my reading, I have found that the older theories are a quantitative while, the newer ones are of qualitative measures.The revolution in the approach of how we consider nursing and nursing intercessions in relationship to basic moral leadership identifies with a conviction that nursing as a calling is both a science and a craftsmanship based calling, and the new speculations develop the idea (Puchalski, Blatt, Kogan, & Butler, 2014).The other perspective that is intriguing to me is utilizing world perspectives to challenge contemporary ethos by utilizing philosophical clearness, religious affectability, and proportionate level of watch over the wiped out and other people who may require different types of physiological and mental intercessions and additionally prosperity.
As medication is customarily viewed as a recuperating calling, and present-day solution claims authenticity to mend through its logical way to deal with prescription, the marriage of science and drug has by and large, engaged attendants and doctors to intercede effectively over the span of ailment, to impact cures, to avert ailment, and to destroy illness. In the wake of such achievement, medical attendants and doctors prepared as biomedical researchers have concentrated on the finding, treatment, and anticipation of the malady. All the while, cure, not give it a second thought, turned into the central role of the solution; as medical attendants and doctor's part have changed to the curer of ailment instead of healer of the wiped out. Along these lines, recuperating in an all-encompassing sense has blurred from restorative consideration and is once in a while examined in the therapeutic writing.