范式丢失:当代考古学的理论承诺是什么?

IF 0.8 3区历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY

Norwegian Archaeological Review Pub Date : 2021-11-14 DOI:10.1080/00293652.2021.1986127

G. Lucas, Christopher L. Witmore

{"title":"范式丢失:当代考古学的理论承诺是什么?","authors":"G. Lucas, Christopher L. Witmore","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2021.1986127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A radical shift in orientation alongside the objects of archaeology has occasioned a reconsideration of what theory is in a very general sense. What function does it serve and how might we define it? In retrospect, these questions arise not in the context of paradigms and strong theories, which some consider to have run their course, but in their absence. Here, there is a danger that theory might be jettisoned altogether if its nature and purpose are not critically re-assessed. The modest goal of this paper is to join in on this conversation.","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":"55 1","pages":"64 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Paradigm Lost: What Is a Commitment to Theory in Contemporary Archaeology?\",\"authors\":\"G. Lucas, Christopher L. Witmore\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00293652.2021.1986127\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A radical shift in orientation alongside the objects of archaeology has occasioned a reconsideration of what theory is in a very general sense. What function does it serve and how might we define it? In retrospect, these questions arise not in the context of paradigms and strong theories, which some consider to have run their course, but in their absence. Here, there is a danger that theory might be jettisoned altogether if its nature and purpose are not critically re-assessed. The modest goal of this paper is to join in on this conversation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Norwegian Archaeological Review\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"64 - 77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Norwegian Archaeological Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2021.1986127\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHAEOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2021.1986127","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

摘要

考古学研究对象的取向发生了根本性的转变，这引起了人们对一般意义上的理论的重新思考。它的功能是什么，我们如何定义它?回顾过去，这些问题不是在范式和强有力的理论的背景下出现的，有些人认为它们已经走到了尽头，而是在它们的缺席下出现的。在这里，如果不批判性地重新评估理论的性质和目的，就有可能彻底抛弃理论。本文的适度目标是加入这一对话。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Paradigm Lost: What Is a Commitment to Theory in Contemporary Archaeology?

A radical shift in orientation alongside the objects of archaeology has occasioned a reconsideration of what theory is in a very general sense. What function does it serve and how might we define it? In retrospect, these questions arise not in the context of paradigms and strong theories, which some consider to have run their course, but in their absence. Here, there is a danger that theory might be jettisoned altogether if its nature and purpose are not critically re-assessed. The modest goal of this paper is to join in on this conversation.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Norwegian Archaeological Review ARCHAEOLOGY-

CiteScore

2.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Norwegian Archaeological Review published since 1968, aims to be an interface between archaeological research in the Nordic countries and global archaeological trends, a meeting ground for current discussion of theoretical and methodical problems on an international scientific level. The main focus is on the European area, but discussions based upon results from other parts of the world are also welcomed. The comments of specialists, along with the author"s reply, are given as an addendum to selected articles. The Journal is also receptive to uninvited opinions and comments on a wider scope of archaeological themes, e.g. articles in Norwegian Archaeological Review or other journals, monographies, conferences.