Human science has understanding as its goal, with the definite expectation that understanding is in the moment only (Watson, 1988; Van Manen, 1990). In addition, the nature of nursing praxis does not require knowledge for the purpose of control, but for enlightenment, moment-to-moment and reflectively. The nurse seeks knowledge neither to control one's own behavior or that of the nursed. If it were otherwise, the nurse would become his or her own prisoner, and would relate to the other as dominator rather than caring nurse. The concept of the hermeneutic circle informs our understanding of the nature of nursing as a human science. This circle of understanding, really a sphere more than a uni-dimensional circle, is a heuristic device which directs our attention. As attention pauses at any aspect of the nursing situation, we must attend to other aspects and to the whole of the nursing situation to create useful understanding. One hermeneutist has pointed out that the circle brings us further along, not the issue at hand (Droysen, 1988). This distinction points to the human science position that understanding is not constituted through analysis of facts but through dialogue with text and context. That is, what moves within the circle is the seeker, rather than that which is sought, so that many aspects are illuminated in context, and understanding grows. The hermeneutic circle requires that what we note in our inquiry remains contextualized, developing "new and ever new circles" (Boeckh, 1988). This is in contrast to normal science that requires an external referent for objects of study in order to avoid circular thinking. Heidegger (1988), for example, contrasts the vicious circle of normal science (tautology) with the circle of hermeneutic: " . . . in the circle is hidden a positive possibility of the most primordial kind of knowing" (p. 225). We would propose that valid knowing in nursing is that which is known from within the circle.