Oh, come on Bill, how would one recognise a good archaeologist? Probably one
that digs up human beings and not things!
A "good archaeologist" can be judged by her/his results. By
extension an incompetent archaeologist ought not to be allowed
to dig in the first place, leaving the site alone.
By contrast the results of a "good psychotherapist" cannot be
judged objectively. How would one expect to distinguish good
from incompetent, giving the psychobabble and mumbo-jumbo
involved? Some things are better left alone.