Abstract
Michael Fotiadis (1994) and Barbara Little (1994) both question the oppositions that structure current debate about the “objectivity” of archaeological science; they raise concerns about my own proposal for a “mitigated objectivism” where it reaffirms these oppositions. I welcome their discussion and offer three responses to clarify and situate my own position. Most valuable, they identify several lines of inquiry that should be pursued beyond the philosophical analyses I have developed, in this instance of gender research.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Museology,Archeology,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),History
Cited by
23 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Feminismo, teoría y práctica de una arqueología científica;Trabajos de Prehistoria;2009-12-30
2. Bibliography;Reading the Past;2003-12-04
3. Conclusion : archaeology as archaeology;Reading the Past;2003-12-04
4. Post-processual archaeology;Reading the Past;2003-12-04
5. Contextual archaeology;Reading the Past;2003-12-04