Knowledge production

We believe we are masters of reality when we discuss issues of economy, politics, management, education, public affairs and even foreign situations. We echo opinions, as if they were our own, based on news and comments made in the media, without realizing that we are part of what is known as an opinion matrix. We defend our "truths" without considering that our opinion of reality is influenced by our personal needs, professional experiences, interests and the cultural world. On the other hand, the lack of an objective awareness of reality makes it rise above the ability to intervene, since it becomes distorted and subjective to our perception.

Subjectivizing goes far beyond conditioning the interpretation of reality; limits the ability to intervene to put it at personal and collective service. We consider that what we "know" precedes the existence of the real world. In this way, when we face a certain circumstance and it does not fit within the conception we have of it, we limit our participation by putting value judgments on it.

If the theoretical patterns with which we appreciate reality do not fit, we make judgments about it, we label it with epithets that reflect our own inability to deal with it. The lack of communication between reality and the subject, prevents the possibility to intervene. In the absence of a fluid dialogue, it is impossible to demonstrate, before himself, the personal capacity to achieve, reducing self-esteem, assuming conservative positions and a fearful attitude. Therein lies the problem, we feel fearful and prone to follow socially accepted behavioral patterns, without evaluating its relevance to the individual security it generates.

The limitation to intervene in reality is practically generalized in modern man. It has more and more information every day, but less capacity to solve the challenges imposed by its reality. Urban concentration has distanced man from rural activity, from where he extracted the goods with which to satisfy his needs; using their own physical and intellectual capacities to produce.

The man has isolated himself in the city, losing the ideal mechanism of personal self-worth, his ability to satisfy personal and collective requirements. In the urban environment, he solves his needs through cronyism, flattery, political participation, among others, mechanisms that frustrate him, alienate him, make him aggressive, fearful, individualistic, and contribute very little to his self-esteem.

To reconcile urban survival and the methods used to achieve it, man uses mental and emotional subterfuges that offer support to his personality. Seeks explanation of their personal situation, in cognitive antecedents acquired and induced through formal and informal mechanisms of socialization. Although the knowledge acquired to date has proven its usefulness, it is mounted on a "philosophical" framework, which intentionally and implicitly induces in man, a constructive way of thinking, which clings to what he "knows", unifying thus his conduct, making him increasingly conservative.

By conditioning the construction of man's thinking to values, principles and norms that are alien to the human condition, his personal behavior contradicts his needs, feeling alien to his environment, to his reality and even to himself.

It can be developed in any area of ​​knowledge and social performance, as long as reality does not contradict the information that has been provided. Within these limits, all is well. But when challenged by needs and problems that are outside the limits and pre-established theoretical conceptions, it is then that man finds his ability to understand and interpret reality reduced and, therefore, his ability to modify it is diminished. He is unable to develop his own conceptualization, nor does he dare to risk being judged for it.

It is convenient to clarify that the paradigms within which man evolves offer him security, but are sometimes in contradiction with his own nature. By placing personal decisions in superior forces, man becomes a manageable being, he becomes blurred within the social mass but in that anonymity he feels safe. This has made it possible to build and consolidate the society we know today. The ideological framework that regulates the social and individual evolution of the human being and conditions their behavior, allows the constitution and consolidation of the social institution.

Society has interests and mechanisms of perpetuation that are far above man, which limit his ability to satisfy the need for survival, to the same extent that it fosters urban concentration where service activities are privileged at the expense of productive activities. The internal contradiction of being and the social position it occupies come into conflict. Personal security and self-esteem lack real support: by not having, I am not worth, I am not. The social conflicts caused by the appropriation and accumulation of production surpluses also take expression in the inner conflict of man.

The normative and institutional remain above who is supposed to serve. The State, society, education, business, health, security, government, production, religion, norms, laws and beliefs need to be served, but they do not focus their real attention on man. For example, education serves itself, spreading "truths", without paying primary attention to fostering analytical capacity or creativity. It is a conservative and perpetuating institution of the society that conceives it.

As we mentioned earlier, society has rendered a great service to man in terms of the security it offers him in regard to material well-being, but the transcendental development of man has not been among its priorities.

Being the male actor, creator and architect of the social institution, he has fallen into his own trap. The system has been in charge of maintaining its dynamics and coherence, placing it below its own creation. Although historically man sought explanations for his concerns, in myths and mystifications of reality, this dynamic enveloped him in such a way that, despite the technological development achieved, man has become the vehicle to preserve the traditional. Despite this relationship between society and the individual, the average human intellect diversifies and continually increases in complexity and wealth; Thus, an epistemic centered on the object, on reality, arises.

To perpetuate itself, society maintains philosophical paradigms transmitted from generation to generation, regardless of the forms that the explanatory theories of reality take. The epistemological point of view that prevails from the first social groups, prevails practically unalterable. The mythical and mystical conceptions that have been explaining the real world and the human role, intentionally put concepts that have behaved more like dominating ideologies, than as an interpretation of the structure of thought, commonly known as philosophy.

The relationship between man and his reality is a material and concrete fact. It originates to meet their basic survival needs and is conditioned by the development achieved in the cognitive and technical media for a certain historical moment. On the other hand, it is affected by the ecological and cultural characteristics in which it is immersed. Man's conceptions of himself and his relationships with the world are also real and objective facts, even when they are intangible and unconscious to him. We can understand it as an epistemic relationship, in such a way that it goes beyond the mere study of the elements of theoretical mediation.

To illustrate the epistemia that has been guiding the relationship between man and reality, since ancient times we cite the Myth of the Cave. Plato conceived that every human being, from birth, brings knowledge from the "world of ideas", dictated by the spirits that live there. In the earthly passage, man will remember the pre-established concepts; the wisdom achieved in the course of his life will determine his ascent to the top of Uranus. For Plato, knowledge or concepts precede reality, thus evidencing the necessary guidance that man of the time required to behave in society. Precepts, norms, laws and truths of all kinds, have been shown as valid reasons to explain the real world, the behavior of man and his conscience. Since then, a structure of thought has been validated,applicable in all times and situations. This conception reduces and limits human creativity, even when it has facilitated life in society, and superimposed intentionality on human needs.

In this way, other constructive ways of thinking have been neglected. Aristotelian praxis, set aside for several centuries, recognizes that knowledge is in things and its relationship is made directly with them. When the material evidences put into discussion the traditional assertions, interpretative forms were conceived that were mediated, by conceiving that the knowledge revealed by science was also divine work… In this way, science was mediated practically from its beginning, and they platonized Aristotle.

"Tomás de Aquino and Alberto Magno were the main ideologues of this conception and they managed to combine the comprehensive system of nature with Christian theology and ethics" (Ginés, 1993: 24)

"Very little was the contribution of the Middle Ages to enrich the field of natural sciences, if we except Alberto Magno), since the" authority of the "masters" was always wielded as an argument of truth and certainty. " (Ginés, 1993: 52)

2. Has this situation changed? Is today different?

The social institution and its ideological base are perpetuated through powerful interests when carrying out the application of the socialization mechanism, which join the individual and the collective, in a tacit relationship of perpetuation of the traditional way of structuring thinking. The interpretations of reality have operated within certain limits, offering security to man, this being the survival of the epistemological approach. The halo of security caused by explanatory paradigms makes it difficult to accept new forms of construction of thought, making it difficult to accept new points of view and conceptions.

By perpetuating the traditional mechanism based on social institutionality, man has lost his horizon. Man is an actor and is the end of his own actions, paraphrasing Protagoras de Abdera (485-410 BC) “man is the measure of all things”.

Regardless of the value judgments that we can make of the mechanism of man's subordination, it has served as the basis for the consolidation of today's society. She herself has allowed man to evolve within the safety limits imposed by his survival, until he reaches a high level of consciousness of his reality and of himself. Now, it is necessary to become aware that society will not be able to change as long as its paradigms and members do not accept their share of individual and collective responsibility.

To achieve this goal, man and his reality must be reinterpreted. It is necessary for man to become aware of his leading role in the interpretation and construction of knowledge. It is necessary to give him back his ability to create, to be a builder of his own future, making this desire a conscious and intentional will.

In the field of practical application, the fact of wrapping the process of interpretation of reality in a halo of scientificity, reducing its use to a certain number of people and with scientific positivism, on the other hand, has limited the awareness of the man, as the being with the capacity to intentionally modify his environment, through his reasoning.

This work aims to revalue the process that man uses to interpret and modify reality for his own benefit and that of the collective, through direct and transformative participation. Regardless of the existence of conservative ideologies to curb this trend, the development of communications is giving rise to a new point of view with which reality is analyzed, interpreted and modified.

This theoretical development aims to promote the creative potential of the individual, in the face of the unifying process, with the emergence of a new interpretive form of reality and of conceptualizing man himself as a relational product. and historical. Contrary to individualism, this cognitive conception holistically revalues ​​the person, where self-esteem plays a fundamental role.

The development of new approaches, conceptions, theories and measurement instruments, enhance human analysis and creativity, aim to make it aware, not only of its creative potential, but of the self-construction process which is achieved by getting involved in the interpretation and modification of the reality that surrounds it.

As a manifestation of the existing problem when constructing the interpretation of reality, based on pre-existing conceptualizations and the generalized in the discussion of this approach, we quote from Umberto Eco in his novel Foucault's Pendulum There is a conversation between his characters Jacopo Belbo and Casaubon, regarding the judgment that the former makes of the writers who send their texts to the editorial committee of publishing houses.

“-… We are already at the threshold where we suspect that something is not working. But it takes an effort to show what is wrong and why. ….. Many books written by stupid people are published, because at first glance they are very convincing. The editorial writer is not obliged to acknowledge the stupid. The Academy of Sciences doesn't do it, why should he?

- Neither does philosophy. San Anselmo's ontological argument is stupid. God has to exist because I can think of him as being endowed with all perfections, including existence. It confuses existence in thought with existence in reality.

- Yes, but Gaunilo's rebuttal is also stupid. I can think of an island in the sea even though that island does not exist. It confuses the thought of the contingent with the thought of the necessary. " (Umberto Eco, 1991: 62)

Throughout history, Aristotle has been platonized and science mediated, distancing it from the common man, making him assume an interpretive orientation and intentional methodological resources, committing him to the perpetuation of the social system.

By placing the interpretation of reality, subject to pre-existing concepts, "knowledge" verifies the conception rather than understanding the real, relegating it to a second level of interest, allowing only an interpretation conditioned to what was previously theorized. Place the academic institution over any interest, no matter how legitimate it is.

Some thinkers may continue to argue that enhancing individual development versus the institutional makes man an anarchic being. This is a fallacy: a man who values ​​himself as an individual tends to recognize the value of his fellow man for himself. It tends to overcome aggressive individualism by a synergistic empathy, where it is understood that the whole is more than the sum of its parts.

Another objective of this work is to promote the development of a theoretical conception aimed at stimulating the analysis of reality, with clearly practical and utilitarian purposes.

The proposed approach conditions, then, our responses to the objective interpretation of the real, abandoning value judgments and reducing the dangerous tendency to impulsivity, realizing that what we perceive is not necessarily the substance of the real, but that of the real. We perceive filtered by the mental and cultural scheme. Faced with a situation that challenges us, we respond impulsively without thinking that in this way we lose the possibility of being effective, as well as losing valuable opportunities for success.

Although we assume that this action is "instinctive", we respond under the guidelines of the learned "epistemic and cultural" approach. Reality is not what we perceive, nor is what we perceive reality; we respond to the phenomenological, but not to the causal.

With the intention of facilitating the understanding of the process of interpreting reality, man has formulated, throughout his historical trajectory, theoretical constructs with which he understands the real world that surrounds him, obtaining a progressive awareness of himself. It has been a long interpretive journey, between the moment when man appears on earth until today. From the first interpretive moment, the process of abstracting the real world has not stopped, nor will it ever stop.

Initially, the real concern of primitive man was to survive, feed and protect himself, but the interpretive event occurred without intending to. During the very activity of intervening, nature was put in communication with a real world which, at first, it could not understand, since it lacked an element of mediation that would allow it. As language begins to develop, the interventionist activity of nature is more intentional and conscious every day.

With the passage of time, the need to intervene and modify the real world more radically, demanded that simple praxis require a more complex explanatory level. The explanatory discourse on the why and the how, founded theories of greater objectivity about the operation, the reason and the cause of things. It is there when a new mediating development gradually takes on relevance between man and his reality: theories are built. In the same way, man begins to know his capacities and power to intervene in reality, he becomes aware of his own intellectual capacity. Likewise, he undertakes the distinction between himself and the things of the reality in which he participates. He begins to abstract himself and to analyze his own mental process.

To the same extent that man invests time and effort in the search for explanations, he is becoming aware of himself, in a dialectical process of self-understanding, while his reality intervenes, he receives answers to his theoretical conceptions and of himself. The epistemological conception arises, in other words, the concept that describes the comprehensive relational process between man and his real world. This process is built, on the basis of experience, on the existential, on an explanation of the relationship between the real world and man, with crucial effects on knowledge.

Knowledge was first the result of a pragmatic learning, giving way to discursive reasoning, to later become aware of oneself, and of things: primum vivere, deinde philosophare.

This discourse is just another theoretical construct; an explanation in which live experiences and all the powerful prevailing philosophical system concur, underlying the current educational culture that is historical, social and ecological. The same construct is developed as an expression and personal need to manifest the relationship between man and his own reality, obtained as a product of sustained research activity. The intention to underline that this epistemic formulation is a product of personal reflections lies in the fact that self-consciousness arises from the concrete relationship between the individual and the real world, and that the explanation of the epistemological process is not a "truth" but its point of view. By disclosing it, it is about submitting it to public discussion, in order to nurture it.If there are coincidences with other positions, they are originated in the very condition that the investigation is a human, historical, social and spatial expression.

3. Origin of Knowledge

To interpret the origin of knowledge, we will start by analyzing the fundamental relationship that is established between man and the real world. Its basic need is to survive, just like that of any other organism. This need can be objectively understood through the amount required and the time it takes to achieve it. When the development of knowledge and the techniques to produce are scarce, the quantity is limited and the time is longer. In this way, the human being must invest a lot of effort and submit to great risks.

The location of the human population in areas of abundance allowed the investment of time to be less and the volume of what was obtained was greater, leaving free time and reducing the conflict. Thus he was able to establish more stable group relationships, nourish himself with emotionally valued information, feel fear, comfort, well-being, etc., but where abundance allowed it, he was nourished by sounds, smells, colors, new sensations, which induced him to reproduce them; it also proved its ability to produce death, or to prolong life. He hunted and fished, enriching his relationships with nature. He individually reproduced what was observed, and then associated the sounds heard with those he could emit, later he gave them meaning and convinced them with the other members of the human group.By making the sounds emitted to be recognized by others, they tacitly agreed on the relationship of the sound signals emitted with particular phenomena. Thus, the first form of information exchange was born, the onomatopoeic language.

A relationship of abstraction or representativeness was established between the sign and the fact. Every time a sound stimulates us, the image appears simultaneously in our brain; but this is not reality but its representation, its abstraction. For the “sound” sign to have communicational value, its meaning must be recognized by the other members of the group.

Every time we communicate, it occurs in a mediated way, through abstract signs, socially accepted and agreed. We construct the interpretation of the real world and anticipate action with the elements of language.

“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world. The limits of my world are the limits of my language ”points out Wittgenstein (1991) and the interpretation that we make of the real world through abstract, conventional and conventional signs is considered as knowledge. Man separates himself from the rest of the animals from the moment he assigned meaning to an abstraction: sound, gesture, graphic, etc.

Observing the historical development of the man / reality relationship, allows to show the evolution and sophistication of abstract signs, generated in the increasing and continuous intervention in nature. As these elements of interpretive mediation develop, the human capacity to intervene in the real world increases, new technological and organizational means develop. Social institutions such as the State, education, the military appear; as well as the ethical, moral and legal codes, which have contributed to the historical development of society, opposing institutional objectives above the nature of the individual. Wittgenstein's quote is pertinent to show the dialectical continuum in the formation of man's consciousness,to the same extent that he is involved in the construction of his world. Thus interpreted knowledge (language, theories and philosophy), it is located as a tool of man. The proposed theoretical construct gives knowledge its historical, social and spatial character, in permanent transformation and enrichment, its utilitarian value and highly linked to reality.

The scientific character granted to a certain type of knowledge is the product of a conscious and intentional act of searching for a more objective explanation of reality, which can be verified in any part of the world, acquiring its "universal" character. Faced with the local need to face a certain problem situation, the utilitarian value of knowledge is more relevant than its universality condition. The elaboration of explanations linked to a concrete solution, strengthens the position of man, empowers him, offers him a concrete platform on which he builds his own appreciation, in addition to teaching him to value foreign theoretical constructs; it becomes a "universal" being.

This epistemological conception is based on the fact that man is a being, that he builds himself, being in turn, cultural, historical, spatial, and environmental concretion. He builds himself because he has a natural resource, in addition to the senses, with which he elaborates an interpretation of the world, which allows him to become aware of his own condition and the relational world.

In this conception, it insists on reality as itself, everything that is in the environment of man, in the physical / natural and social and the effect that it causes. The reality is rich in shapes, colors, smells and flavors and of great diversity and complexity with properties that are inherent to it. The qualitative or the quantitative that we attribute to it are theoretical developments that allow us to perceive it in a particular way and interpret it with comparative evaluations.

4. Categories for the interpretation of reality

The way of approaching the interpretation of reality, with this approach, is represented by:

- the resource of the human condition method

- a point of view approach

- a knowledge area theory

Within the context in which the present epistemic conception operates, man has certain components with which he interprets his reality: one of a natural nature as a thinking being and others of a cultural nature as theoretical constructs that mediate between him and his world, which we group them into epistemological categories.

The method is conceptualized as a resource inherent to the human condition, through which the person approaches an interpretation of reality. It has the highest level of specificity, since it defines the interpretive behavior of reality. The methodical resource is not an element of mediation but it grounds and gives coherence to our theoretical construct.

We conceptualize the method as the logical and natural resource that complements the senses, to process information from the world that surrounds it. It has a sequence of steps, stages or tasks organized sequentially, to achieve knowledge in harmony with reality itself. The method allows man to be human, developing his ability to intervene in the world in order to satisfy his needs.

The methodical resource is present in man, although he is not aware of it. It operates in him as the basis of his own nature, but his continuous and sustained intervention in reality has induced him to develop mediating elements, with which he constructs an explanation; Initially the explanations were pragmatic and later speculative mystifications, but with the passing of time, it has come to objectify them, becoming aware of its creative power.

The approach represents a philosophical point of view. With the daily and unconscious use of the methodical resource, man applies it, without having a defined approach or point of view, nor does he have to make it explicit. It is normal to resort to linear logic, constructions by opposites, contrasts, sequences, series, but the development of self-awareness has allowed man to incorporate new elements of mediation to obtain knowledge, using different approaches, such as positivism, relativity, functionalism, structuralism, historical materialism, scientific pragmatism. All are philosophical positions, evident in scientific research, with which researchers come to establish as an epistemological point of view. From there, the process of interpreting reality,it incorporates the entire previous cognitive body, using elements of mediation between it and its reality. The subsequent theoretical elaboration, continues and is conditioned to the point of view or approach that served as its starting point. In the evolution of the elements of mediation, philosophy is at the end of the cusp of logical development. In every process of interpretation of reality, a certain epistemological point of view underlies, since since explanatory theories of reality began to be developed, the cognitive process has always started from one in the man-reality relationship where it is fixed the position of the mediating components.it continues and is conditioned to the point of view or approach that served as its starting point. In the evolution of the elements of mediation, philosophy is at the end of the cusp of logical development. In every process of interpretation of reality, a certain epistemological point of view underlies, since since explanatory theories of reality began to be developed, the cognitive process has always started from one in the man-reality relationship where it is fixed the position of the mediating components.it continues and is conditioned to the point of view or approach that served as its starting point. In the evolution of the elements of mediation, philosophy is at the end of the cusp of logical development. In every process of interpretation of reality, a certain epistemological point of view underlies, since since explanatory theories of reality began to be developed, the cognitive process has always started from one in the man-reality relationship where it is fixed the position of the mediating components.the cognitive process has always started from one in the man-reality relationship where the position of the mediating components is fixed.the cognitive process has always started from one in the man-reality relationship where the position of the mediating components is fixed.

The theory constitutes a conceptual body of the fundamental aspects to approach the concrete analysis of a reality. Man has a huge inheritance of information and knowledge about life and certain areas of knowledge. The theory consists of a systematized and updated abstraction of the reality in reference, elaborated in a permanent and continuous approach to reality, based on its reason for being, the phenomenological aspects that make it up, and a description of the relationships between the elements that constitute it and the factors that affect, determine and condition it. On the other hand, it includes the technical instruments and procedures developed for its interpretive approach. Theories are products of a continuous process of formation of science.Theory is a formal logical instrument that organizes and projects knowledge to be used, transformed, expanded or discarded in subsequent interpretations of reality.

Process of interpretation of reality

The presented approach is represented graphically in different phases, in order to illustrate the cognitive process of interpretation of reality:

• Phenomenological observation Formulation of assumptions Instrumentation Analysis and verification of results Discussion

The man linked to a particular reality, generally stimulated by its effects, feels the need to intervene to modify it. This first relationship between man and his reality occurs through observation processes, where it is nourished by subjective information.

PHENOMENOLOGICAL OBSERVATION phase ¬. During this, in addition to feeling, we process the information received through "perception filters", which are undoubtedly related to the cultural world and interests of the "observing subject".

The perception of the observed phenomenological reality will then be influenced by the needs of each one, deficiencies, possessions, level and theoretical intellectual development, interests, role they occupy in society. The concrete relationship that the observer has with his real world conditions a particular way of interpreting what is observed. In this phase of the relational process, the individual is influenced by his appreciation, by the personal filters he uses to interpret reality, drawing it in an intentional and particular way, which gives the interpretation a "subjective" character, disregarding the characteristics and limits inherent to reality, as an object of interest.

The interpretation of reality is a voluntary fact, although not always conscious, that is carried out exclusively by the human being. To do this, man must meet three necessary and sufficient conditions to be able to intervene in his reality for his benefit:

• Linking with life. It implies being in direct contact with a real situation. It is necessary for the researcher to have a direct relationship and be attuned to reality, since it is the only consistent and coherent way in which the interest to modify the pre-existing situation can arise. Without this link, the "investigation" is no more than a simple theoretical elucubration, behind the back of reality, without practical utility. Necessity. When the person feels challenged by reality, by deficiencies, deficiencies, annoyances, discomforts, etc., it means being dissatisfied with the current situation, both personally and as a member of a group. Necessity is the engine that drives us to carry out the interpretive process, to use it, in order to solve the situation that bothers us. Reality itself has no needsit is the affectation that this generates in people, which motivates their intervention. Intentionality is a conscious and deliberate act of man, not a stigma or a weakness of the investigative process, which reduces the quality of interpretation. On the contrary, it is the fundamental stimulus that provokes action and allows the commitment between man and his reality. Opportunity. The researcher, in addition to being linked to a reality and feeling a specific need, must have the real opportunity to intervene. Although the two previous conditions are fulfilled, the opportunity to carry out the interpretive and corrective process, both material, intellectual and technical, is a sine qua non condition, to be able to carry it out successfully.Intentionality is a conscious and deliberate act of man, not a stigma or a weakness of the investigative process, which reduces the quality of interpretation. On the contrary, it is the fundamental stimulus that provokes action and allows the commitment between man and his reality. Opportunity. The researcher, in addition to being linked to a reality and feeling a specific need, must have the real opportunity to intervene. Although the two previous conditions are fulfilled, the opportunity to carry out the interpretive and corrective process, both material, intellectual and technical, is a sine qua non condition, to be able to carry it out successfully.Intentionality is a conscious and deliberate act of man, not a stigma or a weakness of the investigative process, which reduces the quality of interpretation. On the contrary, it is the fundamental stimulus that provokes action and allows the commitment between man and his reality. Opportunity. The researcher, in addition to being linked to a reality and feeling a specific need, must have the real opportunity to intervene. Although the two previous conditions are met, the opportunity to carry out the interpretive and corrective process, both material, intellectual and technical, is a sine qua non condition, to be able to carry it out successfully.It is the fundamental stimulus that provokes the action and allows the commitment between man and his reality. Opportunity. The researcher, in addition to being linked to a reality and feeling a specific need, must have the real opportunity to intervene. Although the two previous conditions are fulfilled, the opportunity to carry out the interpretive and corrective process, both material, intellectual and technical, is a sine qua non condition, to be able to carry it out successfully.It is the fundamental stimulus that provokes the action and allows the commitment between man and his reality. Opportunity. The researcher, in addition to being linked to a reality and feeling a specific need, must have the real opportunity to intervene. Although the two previous conditions are met, the opportunity to carry out the interpretive and corrective process, both material, intellectual and technical, is a sine qua non condition, to be able to carry it out successfully.The opportunity to carry out the interpretive and corrective process, both material, intellectual and technical, is a sine qua non condition to be able to carry it out successfully.The opportunity to carry out the interpretive and corrective process, both material, intellectual and technical, is a sine qua non condition to be able to carry it out successfully.

The investigative process begins, when perceiving the evident effects that the phenomena and events present in the real world that surrounds us originate with. The phenomena and events in themselves do not generate discomfort, but the effect they generate on our value schemes is. This phase of the interpretive process begins the elaboration of an inventory or diagnosis of the phenomena and facts, we begin by carrying out a phenomenological observation. It is not limited to a qualitative observation, it goes further. The aspects that characterize reality can be interpreted by their dimensions, repetition, incidence and quantitative aspects with these we are allowed to draw the formal aspects of the real, but therefore, it is still a phenomenological appreciation. At this appreciative level,It is necessary to make explicit the existing contrast between the phenomena and facts generated and the effect that these produce on the scheme of values, expectations, interests and needs of the researcher; contradiction that moves to inquire. It is necessary to emphasize that, from this early beginning of the investigation, showing the contradiction between the cultural and real world of the researcher means taking sides, in addition to exposing personal criteria to the judgment of others, is also beginning to accept the challenge, risk and commitment to reality and its transformation.Evidence of the contradiction between the cultural and real world of the researcher means taking sides, in addition to exposing personal criteria to the judgment of others, is also beginning to accept the challenge, risk and commitment to reality and its transformation.Evidence of the contradiction between the cultural and real world of the researcher means taking sides, in addition to exposing personal criteria to the judgment of others, is also beginning to accept the challenge, risk and commitment to reality and its transformation.

In the same measure that we accumulate phenomenological information, we naturally tend to act impulsively in search of corrections, trying to act accordingly. The response we produce has a high probability of failure or of being disproportionate, as it is not in accordance with the concrete and material factors that determine its existence, nor with its causal determinants, thus generating an incoherence between reality and the presumed solution. Another situation, no less dangerous, would be to act attached to strictly formal factors. If the apparent solution, taking care of the formal symptomatic aspects, has some success, the causal interpretation and the search for possible viable corrective measures is dangerously postponed.

To carry out the evaluation of the facts and phenomena, obtained in the phenomenological observation, it is vital to refer them to the scheme of personal values ​​and principles that generate the disagreement. As long as this set of values ​​is entrenched in subjective judgments, its effects will lose relevance in the face of collective evaluation. If the personal interests that are affected are described through concrete and materializable constructs, the validity of the judgments that we make of reality will have greater correlational relevance.

The observation of reality determines us a subjective appreciation, built by the phenomena that stimulate our senses, but does not inform us about the possible causes that generate the apparent, nor about causal agents that would be determining factors of the concrete phenomenon that affects us.

Assumption formulation phase

Once the phenomena that affect us have been observed, intuitively a causal explanation arises in our mind, additionally pointing out, presumed intervening causal agents. The thought process in this phase can take three courses of action: possible causes of the problem situation are formulated as assumptions or hypotheses; an action project is drawn up; or the previous two, in order to transform reality. The second is the most frequently used route, motivated by the interest of obtaining immediate answers, regardless of the causes that determine the preceding situation.

Hypotheses or action projects are a set of assumptions, organized in the "construct" that explains the possible determining causes of what is observed phenomenologically, or the possible solutions as corrective responses. They indicate the way to undertake the interpretation and / or to correct a problem situation, in addition to indicating which are the theoretical instruments and materials required for its verification.

As for hypotheses as causal presumptions, unlike reality itself, they are explanatory elucubrations of one of its parts, without reaching a verification. Frequently, we act on what is supposed and not on the determining causes, giving impulsivity a dangerous scenario, because we direct our action on the supposed agents and causes, without evaluating the probabilities of error.

On the action project, also as a hypothetical assumption, it is conceived before the effects generated by the facts and phenomena determined in the observation. Corrective plans are often drawn up with the haste imposed by the effects generated and by social pressure. An action project without a verification of its causes, promotes behavior, without assessing its relevance or its effects. When we use an action project, it is accepted that with research we have the commitment to generate social, economic, educational change, with well-defined group or individual objectives. Therefore, its cognitive value has a secondary character, the practical and utilitarian prevails over the strictly rigorous and committed.

When using a project of action to relate it to reality, it is generally elaborated starting from a pre-established conceptual approach and considered as “should be”. The very interest in using this way to intervene in reality starts from considering it contrary to an accepted theoretical formulation and conceptualized as ideal. By acting in this way, the person obviates the epistemic approach that underlies the interpretation of reality, coming to think that this is the only way to structure thought.

The effect obtained by thinking and acting impulsively, in the face of a phenomenon or fact, is fed back with information, its consequences indicate how close or far the previously elaborated interpretation is of the real. On the other hand, there is a risk of failing in the attempt to achieve the expected effect.

Theoretical-monographic works contribute to the production of knowledge to the extent that they are guided by a hypothesis or an action plan to become an instrument of conceptual formulations. Isolated from an interpretive context of reality, they are reduced to diagnoses or bibliographic inventory, on certain areas of knowledge from different points of view of others.

The phenomenological observations manifested in journalistic, literary, historical, artistic, cinematographic, biographical works, of ethnographic studies, due to their descriptive nature, constitute valuable contributions for the development of collective and individual memory, but since they do not have hypothesis developments before facts, Observed phenomena and effects are questioned in the traditional scientific field, since phenomenological observations are conditioned by the cultural world of the researcher. At no time is it meant that the researcher's work is decontextualized, who is part of reality.

The formulation of assumptions, hypotheses and action plans allow the elaboration of theoretical and technical instruments, forming part of the scientific intentionality, in an interpretive process of reality.

INSTRUMENTATION® phase. It is developed after the hypothetical framework and / or action project phase where the need to select and / or elaborate the conceptual and material instruments arises, with which to approach the verification, evaluation or execution of the planned action project. Now is the time to proceed to define the concepts, instruments, variables, parameters, populations and samples, with which to test the hypotheses, to evaluate and execute the action project. It is at this moment that the researcher takes theoretical risks, by taking a philosophical and ideological position, where he submits to the collective judgment the theoretical-conceptual relevance of his work, depending on the results obtained and the methodical coherence.

The application of the instruments in connection with reality and the need to transform it is achieved through the development and application of the same with the intention and route set in the hypotheses.

RESULTS ANALYSIS Phase¯. Once the pertinent information has been collected, a process of verification of the assumptions or hypotheses is undertaken through the analysis of the results; It also constitutes the intentional evaluation of the action project, taking into account the way of analyzing the results and the way of presenting them. The evaluation refers to the adequacy and relevance of the theoretical, technical and applied instruments

DISCUSSION Phase °. The results should undoubtedly refer to what is assumed, depending on our hypotheses, depending on the route used, either through testing the hypothesis or with the development and evaluation of the action project. The results discussion phase opens the way for us to propose changes or solutions to the reality that was presented to us as a problem. If we have used the way of proposing a solution or PROJECT, the conclusions will tell us if the result is consistent with the problem raised and / or requires corrections to achieve the desired effect.

The conclusions of any process of interpretation of reality, be it intentional or spontaneous, be it scientific or carried out within the framework of daily life, are generally disclosed to other people for the present or immediate future moments, becoming these into a mechanism to feed the next approaches to the interpretation of the real.

The search for knowledge through research involves the deliberate and logical structuring of the process of interpretation of reality, with the aim of immediate application in its transformation. Upon receiving new stimuli from the environment, the investigative process is resumed, giving the interpretation of reality unfinished connotations, in permanent discussion between theory and the real world. This process of discussion with reality allows an approach to its interpretation in a dialectical continuum of knowledge production. The human being appreciates himself, contrasting himself in his possibilities of modifying reality in his intellectual, emotional and physical planes.

5. The Role Of Education

Education plays a role in two dimensions. As a trainer, she transfers abilities and skills to the members of a certain social group, in order to incorporate them into the productive apparatus. Its efficiency would be a function of the ability to reduce the dependence of the individual to subsist on her own. A second dimension, as a socializing agency, transmits the values ​​and behaviors accepted by the collective from generation to generation. To the extent that conflicts between individuals and behaviors expressed in moral and ethical codes are minimized, education is perceived in accordance with the society where it is registered.

In both cases, education is essentially conservative by perpetuating the system, and by putting knowledge, values, guiding principles, ideals, codes before man and his own reality. In this way, human beings have been assuming, from the beginning of their history, the existence of only one way of interpreting the real world, knowledge before reality. Even though at different times, there have been people with interpretive paths that are complementary to the evolution of knowledge, these approaches have represented insurmountable threats and transgressions for those who consider themselves responsible for the leadership of humanity. In fact the result is in censorship and mediatizations of the process of knowing.Education is the social process charged with ideologically sustaining the institutionally accepted epistemic.

Between methodologists and epistemologists there are different positions when it is intended to orient the research, under the conceptual guidance of the traditional philosophical position, as the only possible point of view to address reality. It is intended to educate under a single structure of thought, valid universally and for all times. In this way, education becomes an instrument of perpetuator of dependent thought structures. They seek and disseminate "truths", laws, concepts, used in a dogmatic way, to tie creative thinking to a certain focus, doctrine, theory or philosophy wrapped in a halo of scientificity.

It is time for education to assume the objective of fostering and stimulating the excitement of discovery, promoting in the student the search for relevant and creative points of view in the face of the permanent challenges posed by their environment. Research as an activity inherent to the production of knowledge is a fundamental component of the educational process, becoming the vehicle and source of energy for epistemic centered on reality.

6. Suggested bibliographic references

• ECO, Umberto. In the Name of the Rose. Editorial LUMEN Foucault's pendulum. Barcelona: Edit. Bompiani- Lumen, 1995. GINES, Brother. Philosophical thought for a chore. Caracas: La Salle Foundation for Natural Sciences, 1993. GOLEMAN, Daniel. Emotional intelligence. Buenos Aires: Javier Vergara Editor Translates: Elsa Mateo, 1996 LAKATOS, Imre. The methodology of scientific research programs. Madrid: Alianza Editorial Universidad.Trad. Juan Carlos Zapatero. 1983 Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Tractatus Logico- Philosophicus. London, Rootledge & Kegan Ltd. 1974.GAARDER, Jostein. Sofia's world. Translates: Kirsti baggethun and Asunción Lorenzo. Madrid: Editorial Siruela, 1994.GEYMINAT, Ludovico. History of philosophy and science. Translates: Juana Bignozzi and Pedro Roque Ferrer. Barcelona: Critica, Grijaldo Mondodori, SA, 1998OLDRYD,David. The arc of knowledge. Translates: Ferran Valdespinós and Carlos Duarte. Barcelona: Critica, Grijaldo Mondodori, SA, 1993 MORAN E., Moreno, JJ, Merelo, P. and Chacón S. Artificial Life a real epistemology. http: //ssie.binghanton.edu/~patee/aepistem.html.