The essay deals with a dissimilarity, current in the field of Brazilian political reflection, between two different perspectives: one presented as scientifically founded, the other defined as marked by interpretation. Such a contrast leads to a denial that the interpretive branch - dubbed as "Brazilian political thought" or as "Brazilian's interpretations" - may generate possible cognitive effects. Moreover, the authors that belong to this variant are regularly assumed by analysts more as objects to be explained than as cognitive inspiration. On the other hand, the aim to accomplish objective and exact knowledge on political matters, as affirmed by the "scientific" variant from the 1980's on, is determined by the desire to be free from the inherent limits and predicaments of interpretive efforts. The process is affected by an ongoing transfiguration of the object of political reflection and of the whole field of political knowledge altogether, supposed to be marked by strong uniqueness. The affirmation of such a singularity leads to a continuous effort of distinction towards the traditional procedures and assumptions of the field of humanities and social sciences.
Transfiguration; Autonomy; Distinction; Political science; Brazilian's interpretations