Vigilancia epistemológica sobre los supuestos subyacentes de la historia de las relaciones internacionales

Abstract

If this interpretation of the current conflictual situation of knowledge is acceptable, where the disciplinary matrix and the homogenizing prescriptions of official epistemology and its corresponding methodologies, on the one hand, and the hierarchies and hegemonies of the scientific field, as well as the commodification of science, on the other, limit autonomy in the development of science, it is impossible to advance without the necessary critical reflexivity. After all, reflexivity and autonomy are two sides of the same coin: the deployment of reflexivity requires autonomy, just as there is no autonomy without breaking away from heteronomy, from which we always begin, and to do so, critique is required.

This paper proposes a critical review of historical knowledge: what is History; what is its object; what perspectives of understanding are attributed to it; who are its protagonists; how are the causes of historical events established; what vocabulary is used; what concepts and categories contribute to constructing historical knowledge; etc. Second, a temporal dispute: how the times and rhythms of events are conceived; how historical events can be periodized. Third, a spatial reading: the distinction between space and territory, the need to articulate time with space, discussing the idea of ​​a Western universal history and conceiving it as planetary from a peripheral perspective.