Gabriel Garcia M
At present, the mutation and change in the vision of the world is moving from a scientistic conception of the traditional paradigmatic methodology centered on institutionalized instrumental research, in the eminently practical and limited to the intellectual, to an open field worldview that involves the dream of a new culture of scientific research in which the subject is rescued with all its creative potential and the subject is given the privilege that corresponds to him in the scientific process.
It is a holistic and systemic investigation that is truly eco-social, complex, committed to life and supported by the idea of focus unification, it is integrative and holographic, its orientation assumes concurrent, complementary and very diverse perspectives, since it accepts that the boundaries of all understanding, and epistemological approach, are in the liberating action, in the feeling and the transcendence of being.
It should be noted that when assuming the approaches of the new investigative perspective, we must be careful NOT to confuse the "all" with the "absolute", the absolute excludes any relationship and therefore it is absurd to apprehend it, while the referential intuitive understandings that result of the totality, are approximations, which do allow us to produce, generate and share knowledge from an open, truly integrative and holistic contextual understanding, intuitive knowledge says Capra, F., “is based on the direct and non-intellectual experience of reality arising during an expansive state of consciousness; tends to be synthesizing and holistic "(1998, p. 40)
In this way of solidarity, if we manage to sensitize ourselves, and appreciate such alternative perspectives, from new intersubjective scenarios, expressed in the experiences and spaces for emerging reflection encounters in the daily life of academic formality, then we have to unlearn to re- discovering new forms and epistemic models that make it possible to observe, encode and re-symbolize information.
De aquí se deduce que la nueva cultura tiene que darse sin el rigor cientificista propio de las especialidades y las disciplinas, se trata de una visión de investigación compleja que se configura dentro del marco de las incertidumbres y el caos en las sociedad red del tercer milenio, eso sí, asume prácticas investigativas tendientes a generar procesos de acción, de transformación en los espacios intersubjetivos, alejadas de la autoridad y del control instrumental que inhabilita la creatividad y fomenta la lógica de en una racionalidad ajustada a la competencia, herencia fiel del modelo patriarcal, “la cultura patriarcal occidental a la que pertenecemos valora la guerra y la lucha, las jerarquías, la autoridad, el poder, la obediencia, el control a través de la apropiación de la verdad” (Maturana, H., citado por Gutiérrez y Prado, 2001, pág. 17).
From this connection, the inquiry patterns of search and exploration are called to re-take reticular thinking wisely, based on the referential understandings of connections and links, addressing the elementary, the ontological, the methodological and the epistemological: Being spiritual re-inserted in its local-global context, endowed with ecological awareness, which assumes the intuitive and creative mind, the everyday and complexity.
There is no doubt that we take flight from new insinuations and perceptions, from other concerns, from the needs of the total being, integrating because it welcomes the so-called profound ones, and because they belong to the transcendent BEING. Part of new proposals and sensitivities, different but complementary, is the manifestation of the experience conceived in the approach of a conceptual framework from avant-garde physics, which could end the disjunction and sterile antagonism about the controversy and confrontation about the scientific rigor of the approach to phenomena from the research process under the methodological treatment of all modalities within the investigative approaches: quantitative, qualitative and mixed, the latter result of eclecticism.
There are those who think that, due to its “benefits”, the mixed approach is the solution to the methodological problems that the research faces, however, it is enough to take a superficial look at one of the definitions of the mixed approach “it is a process that collects, analyzes and links quantitative and qualitative data in the same study or series of investigations to respond to a problem statement ”(Hernández, Fernández-Collado & Batista, 2004, p. 755) to recognize the need for a new research culture.
The new culture of complex research, part of its own natural niche, embodied in the empirical world from social praxis and breaks with the illusion that knowledge is the exclusive “property” of experts, disciplines, professionals, or experts. intellectuals and scientists.
Complex research is democratic, participatory, collaborative, it is a joint knowledge and doing, it belongs to the community, that is why it invents methodologies, new modalities from its holopráxis, because the traditional modalities of doing research are considered as holotypes, derived from the ten basic objectives of the research: exploratory, descriptive, analytical, comparative, explanatory, predictive, projective, interactive, confirmatory and evaluative. Generally these holotypes are linked in a continuous sequence and, like their objectives, each holotype is of greater depth because it contains within it the previous holotypes; then, they are metaphases within a permanent process of creation, in which the realization of each holotype opens the way to the next.
In complex research curiosity and creativity take place, methods are created; Although the new will not be adopted as a fixed norm, it also recognizes the change and its power in the process of re-linking knowledge, therefore, by abandoning the scientistic paradigm and the various forms of domination, the new culture of complex research it is based on a de-politicized logic.
The work of research is based on a new conception of knowledge, supported by the contributions of neuroscience itself, knowledge is woven into a network, an interconnected network of concepts and approximate models, knowledge is alive and interactive, its nature " it is "process, that is, it has a dynamic and unfinished character, it is by nature changing, in the same way Bohm recognizes that" knowledge is also a process "(2002, p. 82). Knowledge is intuitive, it develops subtly in the dimensions of being, of society, of culture. The practice of research is free since it is no longer limited to the intellectual and eminently practical (formal science and factual science).
This way of understanding the process allows us to recognize that doing research is basically to “know”, the search and inquiry revolve around knowing, which is done in complexity. It is knowing to change and promote actions, it is changing actions for liberation, a knowing that “proposes a principle of action that does not order, but rather organizes; do not manipulate, but communicate; that does not direct, but encourages ”(Morin, 2001, p. 436)
Research practices in the third millennium, especially social research, must operate from the beginning of the authentic self-organization of knowledge, since it has to stop supporting itself and particularly abandon rational-linear logic. Here the approach of an investigation without ties or yokes is proposed, which is not at the ideological service of economic power, nor can investigative practices be linked to interests instituted within an activist current that promotes “competition and quality standards ”, Within the practices of a dehumanized academicism, born under the shadow resulting from the superb implementation of a“ fragmented methodology that characterizes our academic disciplines and our government agencies ”(Capra, 1998, p. 26).
With research in the third millennium, we refer to a propositional inquiry that is established with clearly explicit ends, ready for action and creation, an investigation that is committed to social change and the continuation of life. It is an activity of solidarity and responsible action.
The inspiring sources of the new research culture are very diverse, unlimited and multiple, understanding with this, that their references, in addition to being innovative and suggestive, provoke reactions, bewilderment and ruptures of preconceptions and practices of a very long epistemic tradition. ontological, axiological and academic characteristic of Western culture. The propositional, has that questioning, revolutionary, dynamic and fresh germ.
These “provocative” visions open like fans, and therefore represent a multiplicity of positions, therefore they are new approaches and ideas, coming from different universes of thought, from authentic people, thinkers, humanists and researchers in different scientific fields. Visions of people with an open mind and spirit, of a high human sensitivity, capable of warning and working in communities of learning and knowledge, who started from their experiences, but above all, they are believers and practitioners of a great sensitivity firmly held in love. to life, and the search for transcendence. They are women and men of our time, whose intellectual clarity comes from the need we have for a new science,science with consciousness, as Morin says, “new science -scienza nouva- in gestation is that which works, negotiates with the alea, the uncertain, the imprecise, the indeterminate, the complex” (1984, p. 127).
For this reason, the scientific thought that guides the new science and the new research, must accredit the relevance to human consciousness, as Edgar Morin warns, and re-signify the intuitive, look at the perception around reflective loops, generated in gestation of consciousness, which according to Morin, produce the subject's attention, the consciousness of himself, the consciousness of the objects of his knowledge, the consciousness of his thought, the consciousness of his consciousness… consciousness not only allows the reflection of the mind above all things and critical vigilance, but also meditation. (2003, p. 125)
Perhaps an investigative practice, based on a science with conscience, truly awakens the collective and planetary conscience and responds to the needs faced by postmodern societies and suppresses those actions that are increasingly aggressive, in which human pain and suffering, the increase in violence and disrespect for life have led to the bleeding of our planet in the most terrifying ways. Possibly, a methodology of lived research responds to the threats that nature, human beings and world society face to this day, in the face of global warming and terrorism as a consequence of materialism and the economic policies of savage capitalism.
Reading our problems with other glances implies looking into other areas of our being, which allows, precisely, initiations. In these plots, well configured in the works of Fritjof Capra, it is where the revelations that open new horizons to the hidden relationships that are sheltered in latencies and possibilities originate; allowing us to re-interpret the research through the tangled complex of interconnections and links that persist in life and in social relationships.
The investigative act implies “doing” in open roads, an endless path full of paths that welcome dialogue, reflexivity and cooperation between actors and participants, although research continues to be a methodical exercise (sense of “the” doing), whoever investigates is always a traveler on new and unpredictable paths, but inquiries.
If any pre-conception needs to be overcome, it is the methodical one, because, in the new science, the significance of the process is more important, its possibilities to wander, to retrace our own steps, not to infer, demonstrate and generalize, that is, you have to break with linearity. Hence, doing science in the third millennium embodies a powerfully creative, holistic, cooperative and heuristic act, the meaning of which serves as the foundation to revolutionize the great social problems, from a new rationality that welcomes the unpredictable in light of the uncertainties, through new instruments, methods (plural) and techniques, knowledge as a bridge to de-construct and reconstruct subjective reality.
The previous approaches nurture the recognition of the emergence of a new consciousness, which is slowly but categorically expanding in our lives, on the threshold of a hermeneutic that sows new ethical and cultural values, new scientific rationality, this is how we can rediscover knowledge, recovering harmony in our relationships, which according to Gutiérrez and Prado means:
Harmonic recovery supposes a new way of seeing, approaching and living our relationships with planet Earth and with all that that planetary consciousness implies: tolerance, social equity, gender equality, acceptance of biodiversity and promotion of a culture of life. from the ethical dimension. (1997, p. 8)
Research practices within the science of the new paradigm demand an epistemic and methodological revolution, which implies the open search for strategies for the humanization of knowledge, therefore, it postulates the deployment of the evolution of thought as a significant creative and multiple act., is forcing us to adopt new perspectives and to reconfigure roles, both the role played by the researcher, and the role played by technical and technological packages in scientific-social research, the empirical and the experience of research in the XXI century.
It is not simply a matter of reformulating or reforming but of transforming the intentionality of research learning, seen as an evolutionary leap from its vital niche, complex research feeds on an integral conception of life, in which it is recognized complexity and uncertainties, configures new values, integrates consciousness, bio-eco-ethics and spirituality, assumes other ways of inquiring and interacting.
The new culture of complex research breaks with the traditional patterns of doing research. Due to its purpose, scientific and social research is still basic or applied, but due to its new meaning it reorganizes daily cognitive activity within a series of transformations that go directly to the core of methodological requirements and theoretical treatments.
In the light of such reasoning, we realize that research encourages reflective practices, promotes appropriate ways to assume change and has transformation and changes in attitude as a backdrop, accepts that today we move in a globalized, complex and multicultural, in which living, knowing and acting requires the subject to move on the quicksand of multicriteria towards new ways of apprehending, sharing and receiving experiences, which are drawn in the correlation of an increasingly changing multi-reality, open, heterogeneous and reticular.
So, we conclude that from this new perspective the new culture of research responds to the challenges of a new planetary and cosmic culture, it re-knows the complexity in the exchange of knowledge, assuming it as a methodological experience to manage and produce knowledge, as we see a Research like this is only possible in opening fractals and within a perspective open to the subject-object dialogic understanding, which admits at the same time diversity, unity and reflexivity among the actors; knowledge is provided in the light of new knowledge that has remained hidden in the shadow of the secrets and mysteries of life.
References
- Bohm, D. (2002). The totality and the implied order (4th ed.). Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Kairós Capra, F. (1998). The crucial point. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial Troquel SAGutiérrez, F. and Prado, C. (1997). Ecopedagogy and planetary citizenship. Heredia, Costa Rica: Editorialpec 97. Gutiérrez, F. and Prado, C. (2001). Spring Seed. Protagonism of Children and Youth. Guatemala: Production Save the children-Norway, Santiago development project, PRODESSA.Hernández, R., Fernández-Collado, C. and Baptista, P. (2006). Research methodology (4th ed.). DF, Mexico: McGraw-Hill Interamericana. Laszlo, E. (2004). Science and the Akashic Field. A theory of everything. (M. de P. Pascua, trad.). Madrid, Spain: Ediciones Nowtilus SL Accessed July 12, 2010 from http: //www.scribd.com / doc / 19545345 / LaszloErvin-La-Ciencia-Y-El-Campo-Akasico.Mejía, J. (1998). Recover the consciousness of the subject. The interior dimension forgotten. Bogotá, Colombia: Cinep Morin, E. (2004). Science with conscience (A. Sánchez, trad.) Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Anthropos. Morin, E. (2003). Method V. The Humanity of Humanity, Human Identity (14th ed.). Madrid, Spain: Ediciones Cátedra.Morin, E., Ceurana, E., Motta, R. (2003). Educate in the planetary age. Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Gedisa, SAEdiciones Cátedra.Morin, E., Ceurana, E., Motta, R. (2003). Educate in the planetary age. Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Gedisa, SAEdiciones Cátedra.Morin, E., Ceurana, E., Motta, R. (2003). Educate in the planetary age. Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Gedisa, SA
