30th January 2012, 12:10 PM
Jack Wrote:Why is it that archaeologists feel its important to include anything other than reasoned arguments utilising an accurate assessment of the evidence..........(i.e. scientific reasoning).
If you stray from this path you'll end up with flawed and unsubstantiated conclusions which do little except set current knowledge back a few decades.
Evidence is the key. Anything else is just superstition and magic.
you seem to be confused about what constitutes evidence and what is scientific reasoning jack
surely reasoning includes perspective, modelling, theorising and conjecture
fixating on reactionary doctrine alone is unlikely to advance the state of anyones knowledge
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers