INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
Research Article

Interpretation of Reality in Sustainability Processes: Dialogues in the Framework of Global Warming

Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2022, 18(3), e2293, https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12184
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The environment as a human construction brings us closer to the dialogues between ontologies and epistemologies with which the human being relates and builds a possible interpretation of reality. This document addresses the interpretation of the reality of three people (7, 30, and 75 years old) who live with the consequences of climate change generated by the actions of human beings on planet earth. Each person participated in an interview to analyze their contextualization and interpretation of reality regarding an environmental problem. The results describe ontological, epistemological and the complexity elements in the language of the interviewees. Those elements would come from the mental intentions that configure interpretations of reality (IR) that the participants communicated through language.

KEYWORDS

interpretation of reality ontology epistemology complexity

CITATION (APA)

Sedano Aguilar, W. (2022). Interpretation of Reality in Sustainability Processes: Dialogues in the Framework of Global Warming. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 18(3), e2293. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12184
Harvard
Sedano Aguilar, W. (2022). Interpretation of Reality in Sustainability Processes: Dialogues in the Framework of Global Warming. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 18(3), e2293. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12184
Vancouver
Sedano Aguilar W. Interpretation of Reality in Sustainability Processes: Dialogues in the Framework of Global Warming. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2022;18(3):e2293. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12184
AMA
Sedano Aguilar W. Interpretation of Reality in Sustainability Processes: Dialogues in the Framework of Global Warming. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2022;18(3), e2293. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12184
Chicago
Sedano Aguilar, Wesles. "Interpretation of Reality in Sustainability Processes: Dialogues in the Framework of Global Warming". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2022 18 no. 3 (2022): e2293. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12184
MLA
Sedano Aguilar, Wesles "Interpretation of Reality in Sustainability Processes: Dialogues in the Framework of Global Warming". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 18, no. 3, 2022, e2293. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12184

REFERENCES

  1. Astudillo-Banegas, J. (2014). La participación social va más con el buen vivir que con el desarrollo [Social participation goes more with good living than with development]. Economics and Politics Magazine, 19, 120-135. https://doi.org/10.25097/rep.n19.2014.06
  2. Banegas, J. E. A., & Cordero, M. A. G. (2018). El trabajo comunitario en la práctica del buen vivir: Comuna Manteña De Agua Blanca [Community work in the practice of good living: Manteña Commune of Agua Blanca–Ecuador]. Necessary Work Magazine, 16(31), 12-35. https://doi.org/10.22409/tn.16i31.p27370
  3. Caudillo Félix, G. A. (2012). El buen vivir: Un diálogo intercultural [Good living: An intercultural dialogue]. Ra Ximhai, 8(2), 345-364. https://doi.org/10.35197/rx.08.01.e.2012.14.gc
  4. Larreal Maldonado, A. M. (2011). El buen vivir como contrahegemonía en la Constitución Ecuatoriana [Good living as counter-hegemony in the Ecuadorian Constitution]. Utopía Y Praxis Latinoamericana [Utopia and Latin American Praxis], 16(53), 59-70.
  5. Morin, E. (1996). Green thinking. Gazette of Anthropology, 12, 1-7.
  6. Posada, J. 2014. Ontología y lenguaje de la realidad social [Ontology and language of social reality]. Moebius Tape, 50, 70-79. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-554X2014000200003
  7. Puerto Layton, C. M., & Tovar-Gálvez, J. C. (2020). Proposal for an assessment system of environmental education processes based on complexity expressions scenarios. https://periodicoscientificos.itp.ifsp.edu.br/index.php/rifp/article/view/236
  8. Searle, J. (1997). The construction of social reality. Paidós. https://doi.org/10.2307/2953731
  9. Sedano Aguilar, W., Puerto, M., & Tovar-Gálvez, J. C. (2021). Evaluando la interpretación de la realidad lograda en un proyecto ambiental [Evaluating the interpretation of reality achieved in an environmental project]. Actas XI Congreso Internacional sobre Investigación en la Didáctica de las Ciencias, Universidad de Lisboa. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354387248_Evaluando_la_interpretacion_de_la_realidad_lograda_en_un_proyecto_ambiental
  10. Soto Kiewit, L. D. (2020). Ontological conceptions as a point of access to the social sciences and their various methodological perspectives. ABRA Magazine, 40(61), 33-61. https://doi.org/10.15359/abra.40-61.2
  11. Terrón Amigo, E. (2004). La educación ambiental en la educación básica, un proyecto inconcluso [Environmental education in basic education, an unfinished project]. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos [Latin American Journal of Educational Studies], XXXIV(4),107-164.
  12. Tirzo, J. G., & Hernández, J. G. (2010). Relaciones interculturales, interculturalidad y multiculturalismo; teorías, conceptos, actores y referencias [Intercultural relations, interculturality and multiculturalism; theories, concepts, actors and references]. Cuicuilco, 17(48), 11-34.
  13. Tovar-Gálvez, J. C. (2020). Reducing the gap between theory and practice during the pandemic: Planning a complex virtual environmental project. Revista Internacional De Pesquisa Em Didática das Ciências E Matemática [International Journal of Research in Didactics of Science and Mathematics], 1, e020017.
  14. Tovar-Gálvez, J. C. (2022). Interpretation of the reality in environmental education: Identification of mono-, multi-, inter-, trans-disciplinary and inter-epistemic experiences. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 18(3), e2274. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/11879
  15. Tovar-Gálvez, J. C., & Acher, A. (2021). Design of evidence-based intercultural science teaching practices. Science Education, 39(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.2891
  16. Tovar-Gálvez, J. C., & Sedano Aguilar, W. (2014). Taller: Niveles de reflexión epistémica en didáctica de las ciencias [Workshop: Levels of epistemic reflection in science education]. III Congreso Internacional y V Nacional de Educación Pedagogía y Cultura Ambiental, (499-504). Florencia: Universidad de la Amazonía. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269279108_Taller_niveles_de_reflexion_epistemica_en_didactica_de_las_ciencias
  17. Tubino, F. (2005). La praxis de la interculturalidad en los Estados Nacionales Latinoamericanos [The praxis of interculturality in the Latin American National States]. Intercultural Notebooks, 3(5), 83-96.
  18. Walsh, C. (2010). Critical interculturality and intercultural education. In V. Jorge (Eds.), Building critical interculturality (pp. 75-96). Andres Bello Agreement.
  19. Zachariou, F., Voulgari, I., Tsami, E., & Bersimis, S. (2020). Exploring secondary school students’ attitudes about environmental education in relation to their perceptions about environmental problems: The case of viotia prefecture. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Scientific Education, 16(1), e02208. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6442

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.