-----Original Message-----
From: B. Andersson <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 14 April 1999 12:58
Subject: Re: historians and historical archaeology
bjorn wrote
>
>But could it be that our perception and understanding are narratives in the
>first place? That the act of excavation itself is structured by a basic
>narrative understanding? And as such, not more true, than our
>interpretation of the excavated artefacts? Which gives the result that
>there are no fundamental difference at all between excavation and
>interpretation?
>
snip
Hi bjorn
please remember I am new to this and so i hope i am allowed to appear crass
and/or naive.
I havn't come across this view point yet, and so do not know if this is an
issue or not BUT i have taken it for granted that as scientist we should be
objective. Is this not then applicable in our field? I'm confused.
Or do you mean that there is no "objectivity" that can be achieved because
we are influenced by our past and present is that your "narrative".?
probably none of these - bemused. joy
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|