| dc.description.abstract | This theoretical essay aims to expose how science and its epistemology exclude the possibility of
apprehending the movement of the real, that is, knowing the essence of phenomena beyond the
appearances of social relations, in the same way as it reinforces the sociometabolism of capital. In
order to reach this goal, the path we want to trace runs through the historical trajectory of the theory
of knowledge, seeking to understand the reasons why the main theories have emerged, developed
and assumed a relevant role for the social sciences. We will see that, since the emergence of the
social sciences, its connection was first of all with concepts that depart from categories that cover
the exploitation of workers to the detriment of a mutual social development that did not occur -
although such researchers had a genuine concern with history shows us the barbarous consequences
of human life under the aegis of private ownership of the means of production - and, secondly, it
was linked to the abstract criterion of neutrality and specialization, a science intentionally tied to
reproduction of the hegemonic system. Thus, we will also try to understand how these historical
trajectories culminated in the subservience or submission of such theories to the capitalist
sociability. We understand that there is a close relationship between the way in which sociological
paradigms are appropriated by researchers and their institutions, in order to act in the reproduction
and legitimation of the hegemonic productive system, thus contributing to contemporary science
being divided, ideological and a- historical and therefore incapable of promoting the humanization
of humanity. This is because all capitalist production is destined to generate exchange value, so that
science is not based on human need, but on its potential for exploitation of more value. Among the
conditions for confronting capitalist science, Karl Marx left us the logic of capital and historical and
dialectical materialism as a means capable of demonstrating the contradictions of life in this society,
by recovering ontology as the first philosophy for the establishment of possibility of knowing and
overcoming the necessity of an a priori method as a presupposition for the scientific doing. In their
place, the categories of totality, contradiction and historicity assume a guiding character for the
researcher, not to delimit it, but to keep him attentive to the categories that the object, in its entirety,
will demand. It will be through historical and dialectical materialism that we will seek to achieve
the objective proposed in this essay by using the above categories to investigate the main theories
whose worldview influenced the different paradigms of the social sciences. | |
