The Practical Value of Pure Science

Discussion on whether nursing is pure science or applied science complicates the definition of nursing science. Pure science is the search and discovery of new knowledge. A scientist who studies human eyes to understand vision is an example of pure scientific effort. On the other hand, applied science means practical use of knowledge. The development of contact lenses and eyeglasses is an example of applied science efforts. Recently, a nurse expert has concluded that nursing is pure science with knowledge of its own. Our knowledge focuses on factors that affect human health. Nursing is more than just a fact. In addition to traditional empirical research such as creativity, discussion, diversity, frank questions, various paradigms are included.

In pure science, the standard approach to non-cognitive value is to exclude them from scientific considerations wherever possible. If science is applied to real decision, we can not rule out non-cognitive value. Instead, they must be combined with scientific information (deprivation of value) in order to make the best decisions. Canonical models are proposed for information processing in pure science and applied science. A general scientific knowledge base with high entry requirements plays a central role in this model. Because of its high entry requirements, the information it contains is reliable enough for most practical purposes. However, depending on the purpose, you need to add additional information such as a scientific hazard indication that does not meet the participation requirements in the corpus to the corpus.

Many philosophers in the 20th century believe that logical models of pure science do not apply to actual scientific practice. However, publication of Thomas Kuhn's "Structure of the Scientific Revolution" in 1962 means that the evolution of science was determined to a certain extent by sociology, which did not work under simple logic. Proposed by philosophy of scientific research philosophical positivists. Kuhn stated that the development of scientific knowledge is not a linear growth of truth and understanding but a series of periodic revolution that overturned the old scientific order and replaced it with a new order (he called it "paradigm I called it). Kuhn found that most of this process was due to the human interaction and strategy in science, not its own essential logical structure. (See the science of science sociology)