Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
2nd February 2012, 07:12 PM
quintaine Wrote:Frankly, I am amazed at who falls under these terms, according to this forum. We've had beliefs including various religions, lifestyle and lack of higher educational background, astrology, astroarchaeology, people unwilling to accept current academic theories as gospel and practitioners of alternative medicine. How long before you include certain races, gender or height or hair colour.
Go on xxx (remember the point of BAJR ), call us all racists. Go on, you know you want to; all these sideswipes about colonialism and indigenous people have been working up to it. Go on: go the extra mile. You know you want to.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2010
2nd February 2012, 08:07 PM
Fascinating debate but I would ask Quintaine where he/she stands with those who expound archaeological theories that are quite clearly racist or any other type of elitism that denigrates other groups, Pseudo archaeology has plenty of these (main stream archaeology might be accused of it but in general tries to avoid it). Should we give them the credit you are suggesting or are there some view points that are just "Wrong". There are lines that need to be drawn so Q what are those lines ?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2012
2nd February 2012, 09:07 PM
tom wilson Wrote:Go on xxx , call us all racists. Go on, you know you want to; all these sideswipes about colonialism and indigenous people have been working up to it. Go on: go the extra mile. You know you want to. What is this obsession you have with using my real name? Is this some prepubescent attempt at cyber-bullying or do you have a problem with absorbing new information? (silly question- having read your previous posts) Now in this forum people are given usernames, why do you suppose that is? Think on it, while I report you... again.
Posts: 6,009
Threads: 2
Joined: Mar 2017
2nd February 2012, 09:30 PM
Before we all get knicklers in twists. no names no packdrills. and neither do we cover ourselves in glory by playground slapping... everyone... stop goading and start talking.
and that as I say goes for everyone.
I fundamentaly think quintaine is wrong, but I will hear him out. even if he is (in return) being a smartypants. I have been called a few things... but neo colonialist is a new one I try to ignore that, and reply.
If we can't debate this, then forget it.
ps... I talked with Johan, and he is too busy giving time to try and explain why Roman occupation of Meso-America is not going to be high on research agendas.
You see, quintaine, perhaps you have not encountered it enough to give a damn - but try dealing with it daily... I am an archaeologist, and damned be him that thinks just putting the word into their title makes them one. Earn it, prove it, and act like one. That is all I ask of an archaeologist.
So to expand the debate. I take it quintaine you are happy ( as Wax says) with Nazi principles in archaeology? or (like my wife has to deal with) both white supremacist websites using archaeology to prove their beleif and then - black power websites claiming african colonisation of South America.
Is ther a line that you feel should not be crossed? Like Wax, I think that following the line youu suggest is just as fraught by the elitist attitude you rail against.
Archaeology for all? Who decides?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2009
2nd February 2012, 09:31 PM
quintaine Wrote:"Now in this forum people are given usernames".
Actually, one chooses their username. I choose to use my surname. While reading the posts in this particular thread, I had a realisation. I may not agree with many of the people who post in various threads, and actually find some of the responses puerile but at the very least many have bothered to do their homework, to make an argument for their position and more often than not, there is a reasonable discussion.
I can't help but comment, that what I am actually disagreeing with is something equilvalent to post graduate angst.
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2012
2nd February 2012, 10:04 PM
Wax Wrote:Fascinating debate but I would ask Quintaine where he/she stands with those who expound archaeological theories that are quite clearly racist or any other type of elitism that denigrates other groups, Pseudo archaeology has plenty of these (main stream archaeology might be accused of it but in general tries to avoid it). Should we give them the credit you are suggesting or are there some view points that are just "Wrong". There are lines that need to be drawn so Q what are those lines ?
Good question,
From my perspective I think the theories that are racist, smacks of elitism or that denigrates other groups should be tackled, argued against and discredited on a case by case basis whether it comes from the mainstream archeology field or the "pseudo" archaeology field.
What I advocated before was allowing "pseudo" archaeologists to be part of archaeological discussions not prevent them because there's a chance that their theory may be controversial. How does one know a viewpoint before one expresses it? Do we preemtively prevent it? Apart from arguments involving ethics, morality etc who decides that a theory or argument is wrong before debating it?
I don't know what other lines may be drawn except for various codes of ethics which exist already, are not perfect but a start. However, regarding more lines,
Are you advocating that mainstream archaeologists draw these lines, because who will draw the lines for them?: who will guard the guards?
Mainstream archaeology may try to avoid racist or elitest theories but they haven't always been successful. I never suggested giving any of these theories credit I just don't think that all non mainstream archaeological theories should be tarred with the same brush by virtue of not being mainstream.
Why indeed should mainstream archaeologists decide the fate of non-mainstream theories if they persist in calling them "pseudo" archaeologists or false or fake archaeologists?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
2nd February 2012, 10:23 PM
(This post was last modified: 2nd February 2012, 10:36 PM by tom wilson.)
quintaine Wrote:What is this obsession you have with using my real name? Is this some prepubescent attempt at cyber-bullying or do you have a problem with absorbing new information? (silly question- having read your previous posts) Now in this forum people are given usernames, why do you suppose that is? Think on it, while I report you... again.
I was using your real name because I don't like people hiding behind a pseudonym to attack others on internet forums without being accountable for their actions. I rather hoped you'd post more politely if you knew the world could be watching.
To David C, I'm surprised to see that you disagree with me, being as you are generally a fierce devotee of free speech, and especially as the poster in question provided a link leading to his CV in the very first line of his first post (apparently he has an 'easy-going and friendly manner'). I find it hard to square your censuring of me with your continued tolerance of all the sarcastic belligerant attacks he's making. I've done this before regarding another troublesome poster without comment from you; indeed you named that individual yourself in a much later post.
Ah well; your site.
---
ETA: just checked the AUP.
"* Do Not post any personal details of others"
It's a fair cop, guv.
Mind you, these points are salient:
"* Present your opinions in a tactful and moderate fashion.
* Do not be aggressive towards other members on this forum.
* Be civil in your interaction! Do not vilify, abuse, denigrate or call other members names.
* Your post should be constructive."
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2010
2nd February 2012, 10:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 2nd February 2012, 10:48 PM by Wax.)
Quote:Why indeed should mainstream archaeologists decide the fate of non-mainstream theories if they persist in calling them "pseudo" archaeologists or false or fake archaeologists?
Huum perhaps we shouldn't call them archaeologists? Other debates on this forum are about standards in archaeology and It seems to me that the sort of theories you are talking about come from people who are well outside the profession and any sort of professional standard. I have no problem listening to the points of views of others but why should they call themselves archaeologists if they do not meet the academic and other standards we expect of the profession.
It seems to me that the question should be do these people have the right to call themselves archaeologist? I have worked very hard to be an archaeologist and it hurts to see Pseudo archaeologists being accorded credit they have not earned. They have a right to their opinions but they do not have the right to take on an authority they are not qualified for. Just my opinion
If someone has applied the intellectual rigor expected of a professional archaeologist to their non main stream theory then fine but if not then why should they expect the professionals to have any regard for it?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2012
2nd February 2012, 10:39 PM
BAJR Wrote:You see, quintaine, perhaps you have not encountered it enough to give a damn - but try dealing with it daily... I am an archaeologist, and damned be him that thinks just putting the word into their title makes them one. Earn it, prove it, and act like one. That is all I ask of an archaeologist.
So to expand the debate. I take it quintaine you are happy ( as Wax says) with Nazi principles in archaeology? or (like my wife has to deal with) both white supremacist websites using archaeology to prove their beleif and then - black power websites claiming african colonisation of South America.
Is ther a line that you feel should not be crossed? Like Wax, I think that following the line youu suggest is just as fraught by the elitist attitude you rail against.
Archaeology for all? Who decides? Well obviously you have made the decision. You have dictated what should be studied and what groups are entitled to engage with archaeology, at least on this forum and from your position. You are using the term neo-colonist not I. You childishly call me names and assassinate my character and make insinuations. I am an archaeologist and I am afraid you cannot take that away, I earned it too. I don't have to prove anything to you. Are you so deluded to think that you can control who can debate archaeological matters in the wider arena, do you think the term is patented?
When you have nothing useful to bring to a discussion you keep repeating the same old tired joke, a phoney pseudo theory. Do you even know what the expression "no names no packdrills" means - then you go and use the name. Your true colours are exposed, you are a bully, you don't debate, you decree and have everyone fall into line out of fear. The power has evidently gone to your head. I was trying to make valid points and you return with wild childish inuendo and petty retorts and you have the audacity to call yourself an archaeologist.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2010
2nd February 2012, 11:05 PM
Woooo hold your horses there a moment Q go back and look at your posts you are accusing our very generous host of exactly the same attitude you have. This is no longer a debate, you have an issue obviously, but you are not taking on board what others are saying to you are you?
Goodbye
|
