I believe in the pursuit of building up a bridge to overcome the knower- known epistemologic separation nested in positivism (Semali, & Kincheloe, 1999). I also believe that historicity can be the rigth tool to build it. Historicity plays a pivotal role in identifying the locus of enunciation of either, an individual who might be interested in conducting research or a person interested only in sharing an informed opinion. Under the umbrella of these two foundational beliefs, I do not adhere to the idea of mere historicity of the concepts (Grünner, 2006), while I do not consider history as a lineal and progressive thread that brings us naturally to the present. On the contrary, I regard it as discontinuous and multiple. Perhaps most importantly, I do not believe that universality is an atribute of history; in fact, I see it as rather particular to the cultures of human beings (Moreno, 2000). In this chapter, I intend to establish my locus of enunciation with the hope that it could also add meaning to who I am as a researcher, similarly to how their loci of enunciation allowed Semali and Kincheloe’s (1999) to ethically commit to their research study. However, aspects that seem to be as evident as my ethnicity, have become untraceable within the determinism of what Chaves and Zambrano (2006) called la nación mestiza (the mixed nation), as well as within the dominant collective imagination of the Colombian population and its genetic and ideological construction that still leads positioning and contestation practices around race and racialization. The mestizo identity conveys the supra-ethnic homogeneity, and, simultaneously, heterogeneity and conflict; that is because of the many ways of being mestizo, as well as the practices of exclusion and subjugation in the (re)construction of the other, be it women, the Indigenous, the black/dark, or the poor (Olarte & Díaz, 2014). (....)