Holmes Dave, Gastaldo Denise
School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1H 8M5.
Nurs Philos. 2004 Oct;5(3):258-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-769X.2004.00184.x.
For decades, nursing as a discipline has tried to establish itself within the socio-professional and the socio-political arenas. To date, several theorists have attempted to thoroughly define the essence (ontology) of nursing while others have proposed means (syntax) to achieve this "collective" objective. Considering that this preoccupation, rooted in essentialism, is pervasive in the nursing literature, our claim is that these quests should be criticized because they impede innovative and transdisciplinary approaches to nursing theory. Our criticism includes the perspective supported by the so-called "postmodern nursing theorists". We argue that the oeuvre of some nursing postmodern scholars is as prescriptive and linear as the ones they critique. Like it was done before, the discourse of these thinkers perpetuates the status quo by excluding alternative forms of knowledge that cross the boundaries of the discipline of nursing. Using the work of Deleuze and Guattari, this paper proposes an alternative way to conceive the development of nursing knowledge, which, we think, could represent an alternative way to explore the discipline of nursing.
几十年来,护理学作为一门学科一直试图在社会职业和社会政治领域确立自身地位。迄今为止,一些理论家试图全面界定护理的本质(本体论),而另一些人则提出了实现这一“集体”目标的方法(句法)。鉴于这种源于本质主义的关注在护理文献中普遍存在,我们认为这些探索应该受到批评,因为它们阻碍了护理理论的创新和跨学科方法。我们的批评包括所谓“后现代护理理论家”支持的观点。我们认为,一些护理后现代学者的作品与他们所批判的作品一样具有规定性和线性。和以前一样,这些思想家的话语通过排除跨越护理学科界限的其他知识形式,使现状得以延续。本文运用德勒兹和瓜塔里的作品,提出了一种构想护理知识发展的替代方法,我们认为这可能代表了探索护理学科的另一种方式。