8 - Before and after science

Summary

I will begin this final chapter by reiterating three theoretical propositions that I consider to be of signal importance to the motivation and structure of our practices as archaeologists:

1. Most importantly, knowledge does not arise from simple one-to-one observations and descriptions of pre-existing categories in the world. Instead knowledge is created from our engagement with the world through the construction of categories. These categories are then utilised as the means to interrogate and provide an understanding of that world.

2. If we accept the view that knowledge is constructed, we need to consider precisely how it is constructed. One of the ways in which we may understand the process of knowledge construction is through an analysis of the practices of particular groups of people. As I have already observed, distinct practices are associated with distinct groups of people or cultures.

3. It follows from the above two points that cultural knowledge is not a static or concrete entity that can be grasped ‘out there’ in the real world; instead people live within cultures, and they both use and alter cultural knowledge through practice. Culture is therefore a contingent process that must be continually performed if it is to be maintained. It is this point that I want to develop with regard to science and archaeological practice in the context of this chapter.

These viewpoints apply with as much force to the study of scientific practice as they do to the cultural practices of other peoples distant in place or time.