RT Article
T1 Implications of philosophical pragmatism for nursing: Comparison of different pragmatists
JF Nursing philosophy
VO 24
IS 1
A1 Mayumi, Naoya
A1 Ota, Katsumasa
LA English
PB Wiley-Blackwell
YR 2023
UL https://www.ixtheo.de/Record/1828303747
AB Pragmatism emphasizes practical consequences and empirical explanations rather than introspective contemplations. However, the arguments of pragmatists are not uniform, as shown by the four prominent pragmatists presented in this article. The major difference between them is that Peirce and Haack acknowledge an objective truth, whereas James and Rorty do not. Thus, for a fuller understanding of the pragmatist view of our knowledge, both camps must be consulted. In the nursing field, pragmatism is occasionally referred to as a guiding philosophy. However, the influence of James and Rorty has been greater than that of Peirce and Haack on pragmatists, which may risk leading to a skewed understanding of pragmatism by nursing scholars. Still, the four pragmatists share naturalism, which rejects a metaphysics that defines the nature of knowledge before our enquiry and emphasizes experience and practice. Pragmatic naturalism can help ensure that nursing theory does not deviate from clinical practice. This article also explores the broad adaptability of the ideas of all four pragmatists to philosophical issues in nursing, such as mixed-methods research, epistemic relativism and realism. By showing that pragmatism can be relevant and stimulating to each of these topics, the article demonstrates that the different approaches to pragmatism can provide more inspiration for nurses and nursing researchers in the future.
K1 Relativism
K1 Realism
K1 Pragmatism
K1 Objectivity
K1 mixed-methods research
DO 10.1111/nup.12414