naivety [naɪˈiːvtɪ], naiveté, naïveté [ˌnɑːiːvˈteɪ]n pl -ties, -tés
1. the state or quality of being naive; ingenuousness; simplicity
2. a naive act or statement
There are times when we are all naive. It can be so embarrassing! When you realise, or more severely are made aware by others the abrupt learning is suddenly resolved. Within the bounds of the health career model, naivety can be found and is expressed in so many ways.
Hodges' model may appear naive in its simplicity, but behind that simplicity there are several assumptions. When you act as scribe, reader or doer you exercise the model's structure. You potentially demonstrate several levels of literacy.
If the health career model can represent most 'everything', then naivety should be no problem. So, if we visit each of the care domains in turn what can we find?
I came across a post: 'We are all naive scientists' on The Financial Philosopher blog which includes this quote:
"It is clear, then, that the idea of a fixed method, or a fixed theory of rationality, rests on too naive a view of man and his social surroundings." ~ Paul FeyerabendRegularly, I ask myself if I am naive in this particular domain. Am I right to assume that there are questions in nursing that can be answered (or at least reflected upon) using Hodges' model? Furthermore, can this use, this application be demonstrated in a scientific (evidenced) way?
Does experience of programming in BBC Basic as an enthusiast really help equip me now to get to grips with PHP, using Drupal and even Ruby?
Is information (and informatics) really the all encompassing Swiss army knife of a concept I take it to be?
The most extreme naivety here is not mine, however; it is as Feyerabend suggests the one that is in diagonal opposition. It is the scientific naivety of the masses in the social domain. Is this ignorance? In some cases, yes. But the tabloid (gutter) press shouts aloud when science gets it wrong; or, more accurately industrial porcesses based on science totally mess up.
The masses are not divorced from science. True, there was (still is?) a promised intimate relationship borne of equality and egalitarian ideals (education), but this naivety matures in real (social) time also known as life-chances. Its cost is not just red-faced, but illiteracy and exclusion at a time when literacy, inclusion and engagement are paramount.