Practice of academic and applicative archaeology in Slovenia from a social epistemological perspective

Author:

Novaković Predrag

Abstract

In the relatively abundant bibliography on archaeological theory and epistemology the impact of archaeological practice on archaeological epistemology has remained somehow less explored despite the fact that in the last three decades archaeology has undergone radical changes in practice. We would like to point to three interconnected trends: an exceptional increase in the amount of archaeological fieldwork, the fact that probably more than 90% of all field projects are in the domain of heritage protection, and that archaeology has become a data-driven discipline, producing new circumstances which challenge the traditional epistemological views and require social epistemological rethinking. This paper aims to explore some social epistemological aspects in current archaeological practice in Slovenia where two rather distinctive groups of archaeological researchers emerged, academic archaeologists and field professionals. The distinction between the two groups has grown since the late 1990s with the introduction of preventive archaeology, changes in legislation in heritage protection, and the development of the commercial sector in archaeology. These changes opened a series of questions on epistemic effects in new circumstances, e.g. how these two groups contribute to archaeological knowledge, how their modes of obtaining knowledge are structured and organized, what social factors condition these modes, and, least but not last, the question of forms of epistemic asymmetries.

Publisher

University of Ljubljana

Reference37 articles.

1. Bapty, I., Yates, T. (eds.), Archaeology after Structuralism, Routledge 1990.

2. Binford, L., Introduction, in: For Theory Building in Archaeology (ed. Binford, L.), Academic Press, New York 1977, p. 1–100.

3. Bradley, R., Bridging the Two Cultures – Commercial Archaeology and the Study of Prehistoric Britain, The Antiquaries Journal 86, 2006, p. 1–13.

4. Collingwood, R., The Idea of History, Oxford 1946.

5. van der Dussen, J. (2018), Collingwood on the Relationship Between Metaphysics and History, in: Collingwood on Philosophical Methodology, (eds. Dharamsi, K., D'Iro G., Leach, S.), Palgrave, MacMillan 2018, p. 77–109.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3