untitled

process angular view is called upon to help make
sense of and give meaning to the phenomena being
studied.
By identifying our angular view we are then able
to bracket it purposefully so that we do not super-
impose it on the experience we are trying to relate
to. When we bracket, we intentionally hold our own
thoughts, experiences, and beliefs in abeyance. This
“holding in abeyance” does not deny our unique
selves but suspends them, allowing us to experience
the other in his or her own uniqueness.
By intentionally bringing into present con-
sciousness, and acknowledging what we believe to
be true, we can then attempt to hold any precon-
ceived assumptions we may have in abeyance, so
that they will not prematurely intrude upon our at-
tempts to describe the experiences of another. A
personal experience that helped me to grasp the
concept of bracketing and the desired state it aims
to achieve occurred when I was traveling in Europe.
As I entered each new country, I experienced the
excitement of the unknown. I realized at the same
time how alert, open, and other directed I was in
this uncharted world as compared to my own daily
routine at home. In my familiar surroundings, I
would often fill in the blanks left by my inattentive-
ness to a routine experience, sometimes anticipat-
ing and answering questions even before they were
asked. Contrarily bracketing requires an alertness,
openness, and other directedness. According to
Husserl (1970), who is considered the father of
modern phenomenology, the attitude desired is
that of the perpetual beginner.
Bracketing prepares the inquirer to enter the un-
charted world of the other without expectations
and preconceived ideas. It helps one to be open to
the authentic, to the true experience of the other.
Even temporarily letting go of that which shapes
our own identity as the self, however, causes anxi-
ety, fear, and uncertainty. Labeling, diagnosing, and
routine add a necessary and very valuable pre-
dictability, sense of security, and means of conserv-
ing energy to our everyday existence and practice. It
may also make us less open, however, to the new
and different in a situation. Being open to the new
and different is a necessary stance in being able to
know of the other intuitively.

Nurse Knowing the Other Intuitively

Knowing the other intuitively is described by Dr.
Paterson and Dr. Zderad as “moving back and forth

between the impressions the nurse becomes aware

of in herself and the recollected real experience of

the other” (1976, pp. 88–89), which was obtained

through the unbiased being with the other. This

process of bracketing versus intuiting is not contra-

dictory. Both are necessary and interwoven parts of

the phenomenological process. The rigor and valid-

ity of phenomenology are based on the ongoing re-

ferring back to the phenomenon itself. It is

conceptualized as a dialectic between the impres-

sion and the real. This shifting back and forth al-

lows for sudden insights on the nurse’s part, a new

overall grasp, which manifests itself in a clearer, or

perhaps a new, “understanding.” These understand-

ings generate further development of the process.

At this time, the nurse’s general impressions are in

a dialogue with her unbracketed view (see Figure

11–4).

Nurse Knowing the Other Scientifically

In the next phase, objectivity is needed as the nurse

comes to know the other scientifically. Standing

outside the phenomenon, the nurse examines it

through analysis. She comes to know it through its

parts or elements that are symbolic and known.

This phase incorporates the nurse’s ability to be

conscious of herself and that which she has taken

in, merged with, and made part of herself. “This is

CHAPTER 11 Josephine Paterson and Loretta Zderad’s Humanistic Nursing Theory and Its Applications 131

FIGURE 11–4 Nurse knowing the other intuitively.Adapted

from illustration in Briggs, J., & Peat, D. (1989). Turbulent Mirror

(p. 176). New York: Harper & Row.