Thanks Bjorn for your comments
"The problem is the notion of truth".
I think that the concept of truth is a real metafisical illusion.
For some people the truth does not exist. And in the field of
the Humanities of Social Sciences, the concept of truth is being
considered just a lie. And the ilusion of being objective is also a lie.
The perspectives of how we approach to our objective are
alienated with our social experience, so an social researcher
will never be objective.
"My idea is that they are right if you speak from a
correspondence theory of truth perspective"
They probably be "rigth" in the sense that they relate the facts
(archaeological record) with the theory. But what they build,
are real interpretations of a past?
Maybe they are using the "scientific method". But this "scientific
method" could assure us "real" interpretations?
"I say it is a scientific discourse"
So, is a science or a discipline?
A science must generate laws. Does the Archaeology generate laws?
And if does not generate laws...Will be a science?
Maybe the problem is that as Archaeologists we tend to have an
holistic vision of the facts, thinking that the "truth objective" is at
hands.
But as far as I am concerned that "truth objective" does not exist.
We have aproximations based on our owns constructions, since a
particular theory. But are this aproximations based on real past?
So if Archaelogy is a methaphisical way of treating reality.
A science could be metaphisical and not objective?
Does a metaphisical knowledge is an objective knowledge?
Regards
Christian Mesía
Master Candidat Andean Archaeology
Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|