When addressing questions like this I think it is useful to think of
whether we seek truth and if so whether we can achieve it for modern
society looking at current material culture. I would argue that if it is
not really possible to completely understand any defining truth in modern
society we haven't got much chance in finding truth in the past. All we
can do is find an answer that satisfies us and if any aspect of the answer
fails to satisfy - then we look again.
Steve
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Dobson Tel: +44 01904 433953
Experimental Officer Fax: +44 01904 433902
Department of Archaeology Email: [log in to unmask]
The King's Manor
University of York
York, YO1 7EP, UK
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, 6 Nov 1999, Ken Jacobs wrote:
> Given your belief that "truth lies in the fusion between both art and
> science" I would be very intrigued to know what features define for you "science."
>
> -Ken Jacobs UdeMontreal
>
> Gerry Reinhart-Waller wrote:
> >
> > Hello Jani,
> > Your question is most interesting since it's the same question I asked
> > my mentor many years ago. His answer was that truth in archaeology is
> > like truth in every discipline -- biology, history, anthropology etc.
> > He later wrote about truth being in the eye of the beholder -- which I'm
> > convinced that it is. But now that our world has been compressed under
> > the influence of the internet, I think that one needs to embrace
> > "science" as a ground mark, and then proceed carefully from there. I
> > also think that truth lies in the fusion between both art and science.
> > Regards,
> > Ger
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|