Today the scientific, political, economic, cultural, technological and knowledge world is undergoing paradigmatic changes that man himself has produced in order to respond effectively to the crisis of the foundations of scientific and philosophical knowledge. A crisis that generates uncertainty in the fundamental things that affect the human being in the physical, psychological, biological, social and environmental aspects. And this, precisely and paradoxically, at a time when the explosion and volume of discovery and knowledge seemed to be limitless in this 21st century society.
This context is not something fickle, or conjunctural; the problem is much deeper and more serious, its origin reaches the entire knowledge society and especially in the logical structures of our way of thinking and even the methods of how to do science in the way of knowing, conceptualizing, making sense of interpretations and justifications of the socio-concrete reality; for this reason, this situation turns out to be examined within a framework of philosophical reflections in order to rethink a new epistemological and methodological vision that adapts to the real, taking as reference the new post-positivist paradigms.
These new postpositive paradigm such as hermeneutic-dialectical method, holistic configuration, the materialistic, ontological, critical dialectic are inspired by proposing different epistemological positions in order to produce a transformation on the interpretation of reality, that is, the one investigated using their epistemological and your stream of thought may have a different view than the classic one of cause and effect.
These new epistemological proposals eliminate the mechanistic and reductionist vision of phenomena that studies man in order to break with the traditional conception of doing science, where through the dominant and alienating model as the classical positivist man discovers reality, truth of the phenomena that he investigates, eliminating all possibilities of refutation and criticism, thus becoming a short-sighted paradigm.
For his part, Kuhn (1992). He considered: paradigms as universally recognized scientific achievements that, for a time, provide models of problems and solutions to a scientific community.
On the foregoing, it is clear that the dynamics of the research method have a useful time and this over time must be reviewed and realigned in order to generate new scientific procedures that respond to the constant changes that society is undergoing, and more of these day.
It should be noted that this entire process is the product of the world of knowledge's need to propose new approaches and criteria that assertively validate the generation of useful knowledge for science and humanity, promoting a revolution and rupture of classical models. imposed by western culture and giving space to new philosophical currents to create opportunities to move from one paradigm to another.
In our days a new form of knowledge production is being born, on which new trends are formed that search for a new meaning of human actions evidencing new norms, rules or techniques that help a better interpretation, understanding of the entire production process of knowledge.
These new trends have begun to emerge and gain support, motivated by the fact that knowledge no longer corresponds to small groups or clubs of knowledge, but, on the contrary, a process of transformation has begun in the way of doing science, improving the new instruments for solve the enigma of humanity and in turn all those interested in new developments can have access to learn about new advances in science, this today thanks to major developments in technology, telecommunications, information and the Internet.
Therefore, this situation is something real and necessary for science and knowledge because to the extent that people internalize that the change in the conception of the logical structures of our mind and the processes that our reason follows in the way of Conceptualizing, analyzing and giving meaning to the concrete reality of today is not the same as yesterday, therefore, it is necessary to know new challenges in the way of understanding.
The paradigmatic logic in the 21st century, demands an alert of greater intellectual, emotional sensitivity, a constant, proactive and cohesive critical attitude, this in order to avoid the threats of aimlessly and meaninglessly leaving our knowledge and knowledge considered as the most safe for being a scientist
This situation reveals the need to believe in new orientations and trends in current human thought, such as critical theory, the postmodern, post-structuralist condition or the tendency to demetaphorize discourse, in addition to hermeneutics and dialectics as strategic and fundamental tools. that the man who finds in science the solutions of the conflicts of knowledge must have.
Martines poses. the human mind cannot begin to walk except from where it already is, that is, from its singular and personal "inner world", as it perceives it, which may or may not coincide with the "externally human world cannot begin to walk but from where you already are, that is, from your singular and personal "inner world", as you perceive it, which may or may not coincide with the "outer world.
In short, in the new paradigm of scientific knowledge, you will keep in mind that the human sciences are carried out by man and they can never be objective, since the object of study, which is the scientist himself, is the person in charge to interpret and give answers to the realities of the environment; this produces that the scientific rigor does not have a neutral character and of full objectivity as it has been tried to demonstrate.
Martínez stated:
"Get out of ourselves" or out of the world, and conduct our investigations outside our particular position in it; our world view and our knowledge of it are inevitably based on our interests, values, dispositions.
