当前位置: X-MOL 学术Archaeological Dialogues › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Beyond determinism. A case for complex explanations and human scale in framing archaeological causal explanations
Archaeological Dialogues Pub Date : 2019-06-07 , DOI: 10.1017/s1380203819000084
Alexandra Ion

In a recent intervention, Romanian philosopher and essayist Andrei Pleşu (2018) writes on the topic of destiny, We are not caught blindly in a network of ‘fatal’ causes and effects, rather we are integrated in an ‘epic’ structure, on a pathway which includes an ‘intrigue’, a host of significant events, sometimes stimulating, while at other times destabilising, in a ‘story’ whose makeup can only be revealed at the end of the ‘spectacle’. Archaeology is a discipline in the privileged position of engaging with things when they have seen their end lives and conclusions, at the end of the ‘spectacle’. The downside is that sometimes too much time has passed, and traces have got lost, while at other times we forget that any story had a development, alongside moments when things could have turned out quite differently. Thus, upon trying to interpret change in the past, we sometimes end up with what Arponen and colleagues tackle in their article, namely deterministic explanations. Their article raises some points directly related to the implications of a particular kind of data set – palaeo-environmental studies – for framing historical explanations. This range of studies has become more important in recent years, as part of a wider resurgence of scientific technologies applied to interpreting the past. This trend has been accompanied by important implications, revealing the problem of integrating data sets of different kinds, from natural sciences to social sciences towards explaining historical processes. As the authors highlight, most often the explanation proceeds by identifying patterns in different data sets, climate record and archaeology, which are then correlated, and if they match they are interpreted in a causal key. But is life that simple?

中文翻译:

超越决定论。构建考古因果解释的复杂解释和人类尺度的案例

在最近的一次干预中,罗马尼亚哲学家和散文家安德烈·普莱苏(Andrei Pleşu,2018 年)就命运这个话题写道,我们不会盲目地陷入“致命”因果关系的网络中,而是被整合在一个“史诗般的”结构中,在一条包括“阴谋”的道路上,一系列重大事件,有时令人兴奋,而在其他时候不稳定,在一个“故事”中,其妆容只能在“奇观”结束时显露出来。考古学是一门处于特权地位的学科,当他们在“奇观”的尽头看到他们的生命和结论时,他们就可以参与其中。不利的一面是,有时时间过去了太多,痕迹消失了,而在其他时候,我们忘记了任何故事都有发展,以及事情可能完全不同的时刻。因此,在试图解释过去的变化时,我们有时会得到 Arponen 及其同事在他们的文章中所解决的问题,即确定性解释。他们的文章提出了一些与特定类型数据集(古环境研究)的影响直接相关的观点,以构建历史解释。近年来,这方面的研究变得越来越重要,作为用于解释过去的科学技术的更广泛复兴的一部分。这一趋势伴随着重要的影响,揭示了整合从自然科学到社会科学的不同类型的数据集以解释历史过程的问题。正如作者强调的那样,大多数情况下,解释是通过识别不同数据集、气候记录和考古学中的模式来进行的,然后将它们关联起来,如果它们匹配,它们就会被解释为因果键。但生活就这么简单吗?大多数情况下,解释是通过识别不同数据集、气候记录和考古学中的模式来进行的,然后将它们关联起来,如果它们匹配,它们就会被解释为因果关系。但生活就这么简单吗?大多数情况下,解释是通过识别不同数据集、气候记录和考古学中的模式来进行的,然后将它们关联起来,如果它们匹配,它们就会被解释为因果关系。但生活就这么简单吗?
更新日期:2019-06-07
down
wechat
bug