-----Original Message-----
From: B. Andersson <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 24 April 1999 15:28
Subject: Re: historians and historical archaeology
HI BJORN
you wrote
>First we have to define what "objective" means. Maybe you agree that
>"objective" is close to: unprejudiced, impartial, and unbiased? That's fair
>enough, isn't?
>
yes , so far so good
>
>But, everything that have been said in our "objective" excavation, will
>just be objective here and now. Not in another time, or not in a culure
>were perhaps "archaeology", "prehistory", and "science", do not exist.
>
yes, I follow this also
>Conclusion is, "objectivity" do exist, but just in the here and now. Not as
>a time/culture/language independent form of being.
>
>this is where i get confused. I see what you are saying, but it is hard to
be precise about what you mean. Am i getting there a little if i take
"independent" as the key word here?
>
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|