SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application

SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application

SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application

Spirituality is very individualized. The meaning comes from the idea of having a connection or relationship to god or a higher power through our own human soul as opposed to a physical being. I see spirituality through my own christian worldview, as a positive outlook on the present world. Spirituality can be expressed in many ways and does not necessarily need to be based in religion (Sartori, 2010). However, I personally do identify with spirituality through religion and I think it has a positive influence on my nursing care. The values within the christian faith carry into the nursing profession in a thoughtful, compassionate, and respectful way.  “When addressing spiritual needs it is essential to take a genuine interest in the patient as a person, show concern, kindness, have empathy with them, take the time to listen and respect their point of view. Some patients may find it difficult to express spiritual concerns” (Sartori, 2010). As nurses it is our job to advocate for the patient and provide them with a safe space to heal. We must do that in a way that the patient is comfortable with, we need to listen to the patient and respect their needs and their wishes in regards to spirituality.

Reading: Rossi, Peter H. 1980. “The Presidential Address: The Challenge and Opportunities of Applied Social Research.” American Sociological Review 45:889-904.…

What did both sides of the debate add to your understanding of the challenges confronting applied sociology? Which articles and arguments did you find most persuasive? Why?

SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over ApplicationThe primary focus of the debates is to apply ideas in the readings to the proposition to be debated: Sociology should be an applied discipline.

Prepare for the debate by meeting with the other debate participants and choosing a side to argue (oppose) as your particular focus. Conduct a preliminary discussion of points that your team might make—and of opposing points that you may have to refute. Review

SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application
SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application

the reading(s) and jot down key points. Then outline a contribution to your team’s argument that builds on the reading(s). Make sure that both sides are developed, all appropriate readings are covered, and a logical presentation plan is developed.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over ApplicationSOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application

Plan your debate so that both sides argue for opposing positions. In addition, make sure that both sides begin with opening statements that state their position and the types of evidence they have used. After the opening, the sides must, in turn, present their own arguments and then rebut the other team’s arguments (with planned criticism). Both sides should present a closing statement.

SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application Your primary task in the debate is to review the relevant required and supplementary readings in a way that relates the readings to the question posed in the debate. You can also bring in some case study material, such as articles or reports from newspapers or other media or, if highly relevant, from the experiences of team members.

From the opening statement to the final discussion in the class, the entire debate should be planned for 2 hours. This means that the ten participants should each plan for about 10 minutes of presenting material (although this time can be distributed in different debate segments), with the remaining time spent posing questions and engaging in dialogue with the class about the readings and the related issues.

SOC 600 Discussion Debate Over Application Revisit your notes after the debate, review comments made in the debate, and write up a summary of what you learned. Do not do any additional reading, but turn in your notes, comments, and summary with citations and a bibliography of the sources you used.

The stance of our profession toward
applied work of all sorts in sociology has
been one of considerable ambivalence. On
the one hand, applied work is decidedly
below basic or ttieoretical work in tlw

hierarchy of preference, prestige, and es-
teem. Correspondii^Iy, academic em-
ployment is very strongly preferred over

Ttcm^adeimc positions, even though sai-
ary levels for Ae latter are often consid-
erably higher. When we scan the creden-
tials of job ^pUcants or bibliogrs^hies

appended to grant applications, articles
published in journals that feature appUed
work are assumed to be of lesser quality

than ones {Miblished in mainstream profes-
sional journals. Most sociologists are em-
barrassed when we are confused with so-
cial work or with family therapists. In-
deed, some of our colleagues gloss over

U\eir applied work as if it were a vice best
kept from public view.
On the other hand, our roots in applied
cont^ms are old and very much alive. Our
ranks always have been full of ministers
and ex-ministers, radicals and ex-radicais,

even a few conservatives and ex-
conservatives, aU of whom were attracted

to sociology because our discipline ap-
peared to have some relevance to social

reform or its prevention. And wh«i it
comes to facing outward toward the
public—and especially toward our
benefactors—we are very quick to point
to the many complicated social problems
that justify our existence and need for
support. Our pirtjlic stance is often enough
that a properly supported sociol<^y will
point the way to a better society with a
lowered level of social troubles.
Thus, our ambivalence consists in
believing—at one and the same time—
lat applied work is not worthy of our best
efforts and our best minds and that an
^important reason for our existence is that
‘ sociology will lead to important practical

Some of our critics apparently under-
stand this ambivalence si^ciently to be

able to exploit it and, occasionally, will
criticize us on both counts. For example,
earlier this year, Congressman Ashbrook

(Ohio) spoke out in support of his pro-
posal to slash tte NSF appropriation for

the basic research program in the socijU
and behavioral sciences—a sterile title
that hides sociology, political science, and
economics in a plain brown enveloi». He
accused us (on the one hand) of being ojEf
in the cloudy heights of theory and
speculation and, hence, not attending to
the very real needs of our society, yet (on
tfie other hand) of seriously endangering

the mord order of our society by im-
plicitly endorsing, through research on

such matters, the drefulfid patterns of de-
viance that jtfBict our society.

In my own worldview, spirituality is acknowledging that even if people have their own deity, the common ground is knowing that there may be a higher being that exists in the world. For me, this higher being is good and that we are created quite similarly for a reason. I like to think that we are all connected somehow as our layers are so similar and we are made out of similar things, biologically speaking. I like to think that there is something good in humankind and so I meditate about this almost daily. It seems as if my culture that is heavy on Christianity plays a role, but I have a lot of love toward differences. 

I feel that this has influenced my patient care because not only is individualized care important, it is important to accept the person’s beliefs and care for them without any judgment. My spirituality, which also is influenced heavily by Christianity, has taught me that having faith through a higher being includes all of life’s good existence in all that humans experience (Bogue and Hogan, 2018). This is what exists in ordinary life while doing things such as traveling, forming relationships, and as our text stated, also in the nursing field to name a few (Bogue and Hogan, 2018). For me, I find satisfaction whenever I care for my patients even if the nursing field is one of the craziest decisions I’ve ever done in my life. However, serving others gave me purpose as a human being which I am willing to do.


Bogue, D.W, Hogan, M. (2018). Foundational Issues in Christian Spirituality and Ethics. In An Introduction to Christian Values and Decision Making in Health Care. (Chapter 1). Grand Canyon University.