Gerry here: Yes, apparently we are in agreement. But according to
Oscar Wilde, education makes one rogue cleaverer than the other. And
archaeologists that are trained solely in the scientific
hypothetical-deductive method are possibly rogues or more cleaver
rogues. Which do you suppose?
Gerry
Robert Jeske wrote:
> Gerry Reinhart-Waller wrote:
> And if you're an archaeologist, then you should know that one learned
>
> > opinion most likely differs from another learned opinion.
>
> Absolutely.
>
> > And both
> > differ from an unlearned opinion. How can anyone argue that an
> > unlearned opinion is as substantial as a learned opinion? Perhaps
> you
> > need to figure out who has the learning and who doesn't before you
> try
> > to figure out an answer to your question
>
> That is my point exactly--yet there are many folks (archaeologists)
> out
> there who wish to make the claim that archaeologists aren't
> 'priveleged' in
> our understanding of the past. They equate our knowledge with the
> knowledge
> claims of just about anyone who has a vested interest in the past.
> I'm
> suggesting that this is wrong. I think, from your post, that we are
> in
> agreement.
> Bob
> --
> "Society produces rogues and education makes one rogue cleverer than
> another." -- Oscar Wilde
>
> Robert J. Jeske, Ph. D.
> Associate Professor
> Department of Anthropology
> University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
> Milwaukee, WI 53201
> 414-229-2887 (office)
> 414-229-2424 (lab)
> 414-229-5848 (fax)
> [log in to unmask]
> http://www.uwm.edu/wcb.uwm/schools/532/156/rjeske/rjeske.html
>
> Any opinions expressed here, reasonable or otherwise, are mine. They
> do
> not necessarily represent the views of any organization, particularly
> the
> University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|