my question

[eggbasket]

Given that all human endeavour is futile, and that there is no over-arching meaning to life, and no divine being will judge us for not caring about it (my view and not necessarily one shared by everyone here), I incline towards the view that archaeology, however you define it, is not essential, however you define what is essential. It is neither more nor less meaningful than any other activity that life-forms of many types engage in, which is to say, not at all. On the other hand, we may invest it with meaning if we choose to do so. That does not negate my first point, but does mean that it if we consider it to be essential, then it is essential (but only to us). As such there can be no all-encompassing universal answer to the question and each person must answer it for themselves and must answer for their response to themselves (and to no one else).

Have a nice day,
Eggbasket

Cheers,
Eggbasket
Gentleman Adventurer and Antique

"A stitch in time saves precious bodily fluids."