This research is based on the premise that the strategies raised in defending the
scientific status of the archival science are poorly made. It will not reach a status of
science through the strategies of establishing paradigms, an object, a method, a purpose
and a terminological consensus inside the field. But its scientific must be based before
in the expansion of its theoretical and methodological elements.
The archival discipline in their aspirations of clarify their scientific claims is
immersed in ongoing epistemological debate. Under these debate is that has sought to
apply the classical models of the philosophy of science emerged in the 20th century,
such as the models of the Vienna Circle, Feyerabend, Lakatos, Popper, Kuhn, etc
Among These studies, are stand out the efforts made by the authors, to
consolidate the scientific discipline from the model of Thomas S. Kuhn. These positions,
developed inside the field, are discussed in the present investigation
So, is presented the discussion in lathe to the question about whether the
establishment of paradigms, object, method and purpose, and a terminological
consensus of the archival discipline, is essential to clarify their scientific claims.
For this, it carries out a brief historical review of the evolution of the field, and a
review of the literature on the different existing positions within the discipline, when it
comes to substantiate its scientific status. Identifying three main argumentative lines: the
identification of the archival discipline paradigms; the establishment of the method, the
object and purpose; and the terminology within the archival discipline.
Of the issues raised above, is that, the majority positions within the archival
discipline, subscribe to the idea that it is imperative to establish some of the three
aforementioned argumentative lines to consolidate itself as a science.
Therefore the basis of epistemological analysis of this work is to use some of the
arguments provided by Thomas S. Kuhn, in order to identify and elucidate the problems
that take place within the archival discipline, when implementing its claims of scientific.
Finally, it is considered that the establishment of paradigms, an object, a method
and a purpose, as well as terminological consensus within the discipline, is not necessary
to determine the scientific area. At the same time, it means wrong to resort to
philosophical models to clarify the scientific status of the discipline, as sciences that have
been consolidated, have not done so using these strategies, but by the establishment of
a successful tradition of solving problems
