On Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:15:57 -0100 "Juan A. Barcelo" <[log in to unmask]>
writes:
>Maybe the point of discussion is the goal of archaeology. We deal with
>past remains, but is this really our goal? Are we interested in
>knowing people who lived in the Past?
>
>I'm sorry, but, although interesting, it is an impossible objective. We
>cannot understand why people acted in the past. Is then Archaeology an
>impossible science? Only if our only objective was knowing the past.
>
>It may seem ilogical, but the objective of archaeology, in my view, is
>the present. We should understand why our society is like it is
I guess, Juan, that you didn't see my posting of 18 September 1998 in
which I asked:
"But, how can we know 'how the present has come to [be] live[d]', if we
don't know 'how people in the past lived'? Of course [the] 'past is not
the goal of archaeology', but the 'present and the causes of the present'
cannot be known unless the past is known."
We must know the past to "understand why our society is like it is". We
cannot understand what is unless we know what has been.
[cut]
>
>Archaeology is a way of looking at ourselves and analysing why we are
>like we are.
Archaeology is a way of looking at the past and analyzing why they were
like they were. Only after having done so, can we see why we are like we
are.
>We need data about the past, that is, how was our society
>before the present. But, the goal is not to know the past in its own
>terms, but as a means to know what has changed during the last 1000,
>5000, 10000, 1000000 years.
Just knowing *what* has changed is of very little help. One has to know
why it changed and what effect the change had on later change.
Jesse S. Cook III
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|