Background Altruism is the core of nursing professionalism. Graduate nursing education in China started late and is still developing, exploring the current state of altruistic behavior and the perceived experience of altruism among graduate nursing students may have important implications for nursing education. Objective Explore the current state of altruistic behavior and the perceived experience of altruism among graduate nursing students in China. Research design This is a descriptive phenomenological qualitative research study, semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted. Seventeen graduate nursing (...) students from three schools were selected to participate in the study. Colaizzi’s analysis method was performed with NVivo software to develop common themes from the data. Ethical considerations The research proposal was approved by the Research Ethic Committee of Yangzhou University, China. Results Four themes emerged from the analysis of the interviews of the 17 participants: “Definition of altruism,” “Altruism in the nursing profession,” “Altruism applied in practice,” and “Factors influencing altruistic behavior.” Conclusions Although participants indicated that the concept of “altruism” was relatively new to them, altruistic behavior is common in both their work and life. Many factors influence the altruistic behavior of graduate nursing students, including the environment, personal factors, education, recipient factors, occupational factors, and gains and losses. Families, schools, and hospitals should create favorable environments to foster altruistic tendencies in students. (shrink)

Despite the fact that common sense taxes emotions with irrationality, philosophers have, by and large, celebrated their functionality. They are credited with motivating, steadying, shaping or harmonizing our dispositions to act, and with policing norms of social behaviour. It's time to restore emotion's bad rep. To this end, I shall argue that we should expect that some of the “norms” enforced by emotions will be unevenly distributed among the members of our species, and may be dysfunctional at the individual, social, (...) moral, or even species levels. I”ll adduce three considerations in support of that pessimistic view: The fallacy of adaptive fixation, the moral randomness of group selection, and the lack of fit between “natural norms” set up by evolution and those moral and social norms we would like philosophy to justify. (shrink)

When animals share decisions with others, they pool personal information, offset individual errors and, thereby, increase decision accuracy. This is termed ‘swarm intelligence.’ But what if those decisions involve conflicts of interest between individual decision-makers? Should animals share decisions with individuals whose goals are different from, and partially in conflict with, their own? A group decision model developed by Larissa Conradt and colleagues finds that, contrary to intuition, conflicting goals often increase both decision accuracy and the individual gains derived from (...) shared decisions. Thus, conflicts of interest, far from hampering effective decision making, can actually improve decision outcomes for all stakeholders, as long as they also have some goals in common. By contrast, conflict-free decisions shared by animals which all have the same goals are often surprisingly poor. (shrink)

A common method of making a theory more understandable is to compare it to another theory that has been better developed. Radical interpretation is a theory that attempts to explain how communication has meaning. Radical interpretation is treated as another time-dependent theory and compared to the time-dependent theory of biological evolution. The main reason for doing this is to find the nature of the time dependence; producing analogs between the two theories is a necessary prerequisite to this and brings up (...) many problems. When the nature of the time dependence is better known it might allow the underlying mechanism to be uncovered. Several similarities and differences are uncovered, and there appear to be more differences than similarities. (shrink)