17th October 2010, 10:12 PM
Oddin,
There are already agreed frameworks around which we should be working to. I haven't come across the establishment of fairy dialogue but I enjoy the arguments pro and con.
I agree with the tool-kit business. Actually, I quite like a lot that has PP brought to the empirical word of archaeololgy. It was well needed sense.
Maybe we need more responiblity in how we design our projects and ultimately produce reports. But maybe our monitors need to take care over interpretation; i.e. insist that excavators don't ignore specialist reports. e.g. the Wilsfor Shaft where crucial environmental evidence was overlooked in favour of a ritual conclusion (for one out of thousands). I've worked with countless individuals who are / were great excavators but when it came to reporting, they constantly failed to see the significance of specialist reports, instead following preconceived ideas, presumabely hatched from evidence lacking theory top-heavy university courses. A shame and a waste.
To tell you the truth, I wouldn't be surprised that most of us agree on much that we've disussed. Pluarlism seems to be the concensus. Perhaps keyboard-clouded.
Kevin'
"In debt I owe someone a fiver, maybe I should try my hand at brag...ninetynine percent of gargoyles look like Bob Todd."
If you know it then you know phenomenology.
There are already agreed frameworks around which we should be working to. I haven't come across the establishment of fairy dialogue but I enjoy the arguments pro and con.
I agree with the tool-kit business. Actually, I quite like a lot that has PP brought to the empirical word of archaeololgy. It was well needed sense.
Maybe we need more responiblity in how we design our projects and ultimately produce reports. But maybe our monitors need to take care over interpretation; i.e. insist that excavators don't ignore specialist reports. e.g. the Wilsfor Shaft where crucial environmental evidence was overlooked in favour of a ritual conclusion (for one out of thousands). I've worked with countless individuals who are / were great excavators but when it came to reporting, they constantly failed to see the significance of specialist reports, instead following preconceived ideas, presumabely hatched from evidence lacking theory top-heavy university courses. A shame and a waste.
To tell you the truth, I wouldn't be surprised that most of us agree on much that we've disussed. Pluarlism seems to be the concensus. Perhaps keyboard-clouded.
Kevin'
"In debt I owe someone a fiver, maybe I should try my hand at brag...ninetynine percent of gargoyles look like Bob Todd."
If you know it then you know phenomenology.