Epistemology Of Communication

Epistemology of Communication

Communication as we know it is a source of growing changes between those interested in their theoretical reflection and categorical clarification, since for some the statements to turn it into a key autonomous disciplinary science, it is intertwined with epistemology. Despite being part of science as such, academics consider that it is necessary for broad understanding, not only for science but also by social and human sciences.

Within the text, doubts are clear to certain questions such as: how can, in such context, the "communication" be defined in such a context?;And where to "think"? Each of these questions are directly related to the new way of seeing communication, not only as a social science, rather seeing it hand in hand with science.

When referring to communication, one finds a deposit of concepts within which the theories, processes and aesthetic phenomena of communications are grouped a ‘philosophical discourse of modernity”. Taking into account the man/ human being as the main founding. However, it is necessary to clarify a little more tacitly shared understanding of the meaning of this correlation all from the perspective of the epistemological constitution of our field of study.

Epistemology within communication is considered as an option in favor due to its original focus. However, this option must be properly justified because it is subject to heated debates within the same community.

While we talk about communication and its new changes, we could say that communication seems to be the dominant note of our contemporary society and lifestyle. Since the current market of communication -that is, the scope of production, circulation and consumption of symbolic -abarca goods numerous activities of different types within society. However and despite all changes, the meaning of the term ‘communication’ has extended to the most diverse areas and specializations, with the risk of a progressive loss of power and meaning of the word: communication today means everything and nothing.

At present, communication is being studied as a market that as a science. Because communication presents a situation with very few analytical challenges all this thanks to the complexity of the effects produced by the media. If we analyze the meaning of communication, each of the results will vary, all this due to the context in which it develops. The growing consolidation of a context of the social, political and economic sphere, if crossed by a strong crisis of trust and due to this sense of insecurity and risk, both globally and local level. Everything and every one of these produce a need to fall in environmental for which, communication issues become central and primary. In general, we could say that today communication varies from concepts, the context today is no longer the same, since it has been constituted as a complex discipline. In turn, communication remains constantly changing as well as its main actor or "object": the human being.

Developing

The communication today has been involved in a series of studies, although communication is something that characterizes the human being, we must remember that communication can and is addressed from different points of view or from different dimensions with different perspectives,whether theoretical, physiological, philosophical, etc. Communication is at this point one more dimension within human nature. However there is an object of particular and specific study around communication.

The fact that it is postulated to the "epistemology of communication" as a mere probability indicates the little obvious disagreement that exists on the issue of communication in the academic field. In general, the positions that have been given in this regard are that such epistemology cannot be maintained given the "generalist" character of communication. This means that it is precisely due to its "universal" quality, generically defining the human, which makes communication present in the different disciplines and develops in countless perspectives without ever ensuring as “domain of objects" own self.

Although according to different positions they consider that communication only exists as a science due to a consolidated “conquest” of institutional political rights. This means that the fact that there are communication careers at different institutional educational levels, allows communication to be part of science. Although for some communication as such would be scarce of valid reasons to be called science, if we clearly refer to the concept of science: a domain of specific objects, a series of minimum hypotheses from which the functioning of said domain is explained,and consolidated methods to explain it. Although we consider correctly the argument presented above, the reading explains what it is precisely thanks to the existence of “a domain of objects” delimiting from specific conditions whether of socio-historical or others, it is thanks to all thatthat communication is acquiring these "political" rights within the scope of science and in this way achieves an institutional objectivity.

During the twentieth century human communication achieved an important step within development as a science, since it manages to produce a "difference" with respect to itself, and it is this difference that derives in a so -called "change of scale" in our formTo communicate, composing in such a way a "domain of objects". And thus managing to consolidate a specific discipline: "Communication Sciences".

If we please questions, such as how is an object of particular and specific study around communication?

Although communication sciences have a domain of their own objects, which correspond to each medium and communication technology, we cannot let go of interpersonal and institutional communication, which are acquiring new modalities in growth and developmentCurrent of computer mediaization.