Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care
Three prompts with separate word budgets, and the middle one is philosophy rather than reflection. Two arguments against scientism have to be actual arguments, not a statement that science cannot explain everything.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 22, 2026
The scientism prompt is philosophy, not reflection
Three prompts with three word budgets means three separate pieces of work, and the middle one is the one that gets under-served because it is the only one that is not about you. Scientism is the view that the natural sciences are the only source of genuine knowledge, or the only reliable one, and that questions they cannot address are not real questions. Defining it accurately matters, because a paper that describes scientism as respecting science has misidentified the target and everything after that misses. The two arguments then have to be arguments rather than complaints. The self-refutation argument is the strongest and the most citable: the claim that only scientific claims are knowledge is not itself a scientific claim, so it fails its own test. The second is the argument from the domains science does not adjudicate: moral judgements about what ought to be done for a patient cannot be derived from measurement.
For the first prompt, keep the contrast specific rather than caricatured. A Christian account grounds human dignity in something the person does not have to earn and treats moral claims as objective; postmodern relativism holds moral claims to be constructed within communities and resists universal accounts. The health care consequence is what the prompt is really after: they give different answers about whether a patient's dignity depends on their capacities, and about whether a practitioner may hold a moral position that a patient rejects. The third prompt is long and personal, and the discipline there is answering all six questions rather than writing one continuous essay. Keep them internally consistent, since your account of what a human being is should be recognisable in your basis of ethics, and where your worldview would make a difference at the bedside, say so rather than leaving the connection for the reader to make.
Likely learning objectives
- Define scientism precisely rather than as respect for science.
- Construct the self-refutation argument accurately.
- Contrast two ethical frameworks by their consequences in care.
- Answer six worldview questions consistently rather than as one essay.
Assignment instructions
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Project Details: Write a reflection about worldview and respond to following: 1. In 250-300 words, explain the Christian perspective of the nature of spirituality and ethics in contrast to the perspective of postmodern relativism within health care. 2. In 250-300 words, explain what scientism is and describe two of the main arguments against it. 3. In 750-1,000 words, answer each of the worldview questions according to your own personal perspective and worldview: (a) What is ultimate reality? (b) What is the nature of the universe? (c) What is a human being? (d) What is knowledge? (e) What is your basis of ethics? (f) What is the purpose of your existence? While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance. Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health CareAssignment Details For this Assignment, you are going to write a paper explaining how you developed your theory through the four stages (theorizing, syntax, theory testing, and evaluation). Your paper must be 3 to 5 pages, not including the title and reference pages. To view the Grading Rubric for this Assignment, please visit the Grading Rubrics section of the Course Resources. Assignment Requirements Before finalizing your work, you should: Minimum requirement of at least 5 sources of support be sure to read the Assignment description carefully (as displayed above); consult the Grading Rubric (under the Course Resources) to make sure you have included everything necessary; and utilize spelling and grammar check to minimize errors.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A contrast between the Christian perspective and postmodern relativism.
- 02A health care consequence of that contrast.
- 03An accurate definition of scientism.
- 04Two arguments against scientism, at least one of which is the self-refutation argument.
- 05All six worldview questions answered separately.
- 06Internal consistency between your account of persons and your ethics.
Two worldviews contrasted, scientism refuted, then your own
Two accounts of spirituality and ethics
Contrast the Christian perspective with postmodern relativism on moral claims.
What the assessor is likely looking for
Relativism represented in a form its holders would recognise.
What difference it makes in care
Show where the two frameworks diverge in a clinical decision.
What the assessor is likely looking for
A decision that would go differently under each.
What scientism claims
Define it as a claim about the boundaries of knowledge.
What the assessor is likely looking for
A definition distinguishable from respect for scientific method.
Two arguments against it
Give self-refutation and the limits of measurement for moral questions.
What the assessor is likely looking for
Self-refutation stated as a claim failing its own criterion.
Your own worldview, in six answers
Answer each question separately and keep them mutually consistent.
What the assessor is likely looking for
An ethics answer traceable to the account of persons given earlier.
Where the arguments against scientism are set out
Recommended databases
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- PubMed Central
- NCBI Bookshelf
- GCU Library
Search sequence
- 1.Take the definition of scientism from a philosophical source, not a dictionary.
- 2.Read the self-refutation argument in a primary form before restating it.
- 3.Find a health care ethics source for the dignity and moral objectivity contrast.
- 4.Look for a clinical case where worldview changed a decision.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Medical Ethics
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2026
Medical ethics, for the principles the worldview questions have to support.
The Importance of Cultural Competence in Pain and Palliative Care
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Cultural competence in pain and palliative care, where worldview reaches the bedside.
Cultural Competence in the Care of Muslim Patients and Their Families
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Care for a specific faith community, for spirituality as clinical rather than private.
2025 Code of Ethics for Nurses
American Nurses Association · 2025
The professional code, for the dignity claim in its practice form.
Mental health
World Health Organization · 2022
A definition of health that goes beyond the measurable, for the scientism argument.
Before you submit this reflection
Common mistakes
- Defining scientism as valuing science, which is not the position being criticised.
- Offering complaints about science instead of arguments against scientism.
- Caricaturing relativism so the contrast has no force.
- Merging the six worldview questions into one continuous essay.
- Answering the third prompt without any health care application.
Submission checklist
- Is scientism defined as a claim about the limits of knowledge?
- Is the self-refutation argument stated correctly?
- Does the first contrast reach a consequence in care?
- Are all six worldview questions separately answered?
- Is your ethics answer consistent with your account of persons?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read Brinevia's academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Maren Caldwell
MSN, RN, CNE
Medical-surgical nursing, pharmacology and NCLEX preparation
Maren is a registered nurse with over 15 years of clinical and educational experience in medical-surgical nursing. She writes on NCLEX preparation, patient care fundamentals, pharmacology and evidence-based practice.
Reviewed by
Dr. Tessa Redmond
DNP, RN, CNE
Evidence-based practice and clinical education
Tessa is a doctorally-prepared nurse educator. She reviews Brinevia content for clinical accuracy and alignment with current evidence-based guidelines.