Utilizing Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, discuss the concerns of a public health nurse immediately following a large scale natural disaster. Discuss at least four main concerns regarding physiological needs, and two concerns each for safety, love/belonging, esteem, and self-actualization needs. A 3-year-old boy is rushed to the local emergency department after ingesting unknown quantities of medication while visiting his grandparents and cousins. When the child was found in the home by his mother, a multiday pill container is found nearby with four of the seven-day compartments open. In the panic and rush, no one is sure how much the child consumed or what medications were consumed. The little boy is oriented and talking, but drowsy. While waiting for the rescue squad to arrive, a nurse who lives in the neighborhood is consulted and recommends that they give the child 15 mL of syrup of ipecac followed by 240 mL of water. The family locates an old bottle of ipecac given out by their local pediatrician some years ago to “have on hand, just in case,” but the rescue squad arrives before a dose is given. What potential error was prevented by the timely arrival of the rescue squad? Should syrup of ipecac be given for accidental poisonings? Why or why not?
Immanuel Kant's Idea of Knowledge Distributed: 29th December, 2017 Last Edited: ninth May, 2018 Disclaimer: This exposition has been presented by an understudy. This isn't a case of the work composed by our expert paper authors. You can see tests of our expert work here. Any assessments, discoveries, conclusions or proposals communicated in this material are those of the writers and don't really mirror the perspectives of UK Essays. Immanuel Kant is in charge of presenting the expression "supernatural" to the philosophical discourse. By doing this it was his objective to dismiss everything that Hume needed to state. His contention demonstrated that subjects like science and theory genuinely existed. One of his fundamental contentions was the possibility that picking up learning was conceivable. Without this thought of learning there would be no purpose behind a dialog. Since we realize that learning is conceivable we should ask how it arrived in such a state. As indicated by Kant, one of the states of information is the Transcendental Esthetic, which is the psyche setting sense involvement into a space and time arrangement. From this we comprehend that the supernatural contention is a plenitude of substances arranged in space and time, with a relationship to each other. We can't pick up this information from sense-understanding (Hume) or from reasonable finding alone (Leibniz), yet demonstrating how learning exist and how it is conceivable. Kant makes the case in the Transcendental Esthetics that space and time are 'unadulterated from the earlier instincts.' To completely comprehend what this implies we should characterize what an instinct is. As per Kant an instinct is crude information of tactile experience. So fundamentally instincts are created in the brain. Kant is stating that space and time are things that are created in the psyche and given before involvement. Space is a vital from the earlier portrayal, which underlies every single external instinct. It doesn't speak to something in itself or some other relationship. Space is just a type of appearance spoke to outside of the psyche. Time, then again, is an essential portrayal that underlies all instincts and in this manner is from the earlier. Since time is just a single dimensional its absolutely impossible that we could get to it rapidly. We realize that space and time are both from the earlier as a result of the greater part of our encounters. Kant additionally asserts that space and time are 'experimentally genuine yet supernaturally perfect'. At the point when Kant says that space is 'exactly' genuine he isn't surmising outside items. There is no chance to get for space to be an experimental idea. We can't simply think of room; a portrayal of room must be assumed. When we encounters things outside ourselves it is just conceivable through portrayal. For space and time to be 'supernaturally' perfect Kant is fundamentally saying that "they are not to be related to anything past - or anything that rises above - the limits of conceivable experience or the from the earlier abstract conditions that make such experience conceivable in any case." Before Kant starts to clarify the supernatural stylish he asserts in the presentation that numerical information is manufactured from the earlier. This announcement depends on Kant's Copernican Revelation. As per Kant, time and space taken together are the unadulterated types of every single sensible instinct. This is our method for making from the earlier engineered suggestions. These recommendations are constrained by they way they appear to us however not present inside themselves. We have from the earlier information of manufactured judgements. As indicated by Kant our judgements/proclamations can either be expository or manufactured. An expository judgment would be the place the idea of the predicate is a piece of the idea of the subject. On the off chance that it is denied then there would be an inconsistency. A manufactured judgment, then again, is the place the idea of the predicate isn't contained in the idea of the subject. In this way, on the off chance that we denied it at that point there would be no logical inconsistency included. A logical judgment would be "all unhitched males are unmarried". The idea of lone wolf is characterized as being unmarried. In breaking down this word we would state that it is an unmarried male grown-up. When we dissect ideas the parts turn out. In this manner, when separated our predicate idea of "unmarried" is appeared. The brain is fit for discovering this idea without going outside and encountering it. On the off chance that we attempted to deny this announcement there would need to be a logical inconsistency, accordingly making it false. A case of an engineered judgment would be "the sun will rise tomorrow". When we say this it is our method for taking two discrete and unmistakable thoughts and assembling them. There could be no inconsistency in this announcement since we can picture that something like this could happen. In Section I of the Transcendental Esthetic, Kant gives four contentions for the conclusion that space is exactly genuine however supernaturally perfect. As we probably am aware space isn't an exact idea. We can't physically determine space. The main way that we can get these external encounters is through our portrayal. With regards to space we can't speak to the nonattendance of room yet we can envision space as being vacant. Keeping in mind the end goal to be given any substance as far as we can tell we should surmise space. Realizing that space is anything but a general idea we can just examine one space at any given moment and in the event that we discuss various spaces we just mean parts of a similar space. The parts can't disentangle the greater space however just what is contained in it. Since space is viewed as just a single, the idea of spaces relies upon a point of confinement. Ideas containing a boundless measure of portrayals can't be contained inside itself. All parts of room are given to us on the double. In this manner it is a from the earlier instinct not an idea. The majority of the past data is Kant's method for demonstrating that the engineered from the earlier learning of arithmetic is conceivable. As we probably am aware science is a result of reason however is as yet engineered. In any case, by what method can this information be from the earlier? The ideas of math are seen from the earlier in unadulterated instincts. This fair implies the instinct isn't exact. In the event that you don't have instincts then arithmetic would not be an idea. Reasoning, then again, advances just through ideas. Theory utilizes instincts to indicate fundamental facts however those realities can't be a result of instincts. The likelihood of math happens in light of the fact that it depends on unadulterated instincts which just happen when ideas are developed. Like unadulterated instinct, exact instinct, enables us to widen our idea of a question by giving us new predicates. With unadulterated instincts we get vital from the earlier certainties. Engineered from the earlier learning in science is conceivable just in the event that it alludes to objects of the faculties. The type of appearances originates from time and space which is accepted by unadulterated instincts. Questioning that space and time don't have a place with the protest in themselves would make us not have a clarification about from the earlier instincts of articles. We need to reach the conclusion that in space and time objects are just appearances involving that it is the type of appearances that we can speak to from the earlier. Presuming that a manufactured from the earlier learning of arithmetic would be conceivable. What is the Transcendental Deduction? This is the manner in which ideas can relate from the earlier to objects. Kant says, "If every portrayal were totally unfamiliar to each other, standing separated in detachment, no such thing as information could ever emerge. For information is [essentially] an entire in which portrayals stand analyzed and associated." Kant spreads out a triple combination about experience: an amalgamation of fear in instinct, a union of propagation in creative ability, and a blend of acknowledgment in an idea. We ought not separate these means into one but rather they should all be interwoven as one. So what we see must happen sequentially. In this manner our concept of the Synthetic Unity of Apperception becomes possibly the most important factor. This is the place each conceivable substance of experience must be joined by "I think". Everything in your psychological state ought to have the capacity to be joined by "I think" if not then it won't make any difference by any means. "I believe" isn't something that comprises in sensibility. It is a demonstration of suddenness. It goes before all conceivable experience. The solidarity of this specific complex isn't given in understanding yet preceding it. Figuring substances can just see what is happening inside as observation goes ahead constantly. This is the place our familiarity with a complex becomes an integral factor. We know about one thing after another. Every impression is not the same as one other. We should state that these impressions are mine. Essentially going with them with the expression "I think". With respect to the Transcendental Unity of Apperception we are never mindful of ourselves as the scholar however simply the instincts. The greater part of our encounters must be emotional to this mix of things. I should effectively pull them all together as them being a piece of my experience. The main way that I can know about this "I" is whether I am ready to pull together these portrayals. In this we can see the possibility of target unification. There is an association between supernatural solidarity of apperception and target unification. When we talk about target unification we trust that there is a correct method to assemble things. This idea essentially originates from our straight out combination which includes from the earlier ideas. With the all out blend it is our method for assembling instincts in a classification. We should have the capacity to make a judgment. For instance we should have the capacity to state this is the manner by which things appear to me in view of pass encounters. By saying this it would be a close judgment. Though a judgment would be us trying to say this is the manner by which things are. To make a judgment is to state this is the way things are out there; how they equitably are as opposed to how they show up emotionally. For a manifo>GET ANSWER