{"title":"协商的实证主义:弗鲁马克被忽视的认识论","authors":"J. Siapkas","doi":"10.33063/jaah.vi22.80","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Archaeological theory during the twentieth century is often presented according to a tri-partite scheme. This article serves to put this model into question through the explication of the epistemology of the Swedish classical archaeologist Arne Furumark. He introduced a heuristic model for ceramic studies in 1941 that bears the hallmarks of logical positivism. This early appropriation of analytical philosophy in classical archaeology does not resonate with the above-mentioned model of archaeological theory. However, Furumark did not adopt the agenda of processual archaeology wholeheartedly as the greater part of his research was founded on a culture historical framework. Furumark’s epistemology was negotiated between two archaeological paradigms, or two branches of positivism.","PeriodicalId":307112,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Archaeology and Ancient History","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Negotiated Positivism: The disregarded epistemology of Arne Furumark\",\"authors\":\"J. Siapkas\",\"doi\":\"10.33063/jaah.vi22.80\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Archaeological theory during the twentieth century is often presented according to a tri-partite scheme. This article serves to put this model into question through the explication of the epistemology of the Swedish classical archaeologist Arne Furumark. He introduced a heuristic model for ceramic studies in 1941 that bears the hallmarks of logical positivism. This early appropriation of analytical philosophy in classical archaeology does not resonate with the above-mentioned model of archaeological theory. However, Furumark did not adopt the agenda of processual archaeology wholeheartedly as the greater part of his research was founded on a culture historical framework. Furumark’s epistemology was negotiated between two archaeological paradigms, or two branches of positivism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":307112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Archaeology and Ancient History\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Archaeology and Ancient History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33063/jaah.vi22.80\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Archaeology and Ancient History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33063/jaah.vi22.80","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Negotiated Positivism: The disregarded epistemology of Arne Furumark
Archaeological theory during the twentieth century is often presented according to a tri-partite scheme. This article serves to put this model into question through the explication of the epistemology of the Swedish classical archaeologist Arne Furumark. He introduced a heuristic model for ceramic studies in 1941 that bears the hallmarks of logical positivism. This early appropriation of analytical philosophy in classical archaeology does not resonate with the above-mentioned model of archaeological theory. However, Furumark did not adopt the agenda of processual archaeology wholeheartedly as the greater part of his research was founded on a culture historical framework. Furumark’s epistemology was negotiated between two archaeological paradigms, or two branches of positivism.