Results 17 – 32 of 38 by Bruce G Trigger; Hiroyuki Kawanishi Historia del Pensamiento Arqueologico by James F.P. Pendergast and Bruce G. Trigger. Buy Historia del Pensamiento Arqueologico by Bruce G. Trigger (ISBN: ) from Amazon’s Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on. Historia del Pensamiento Arqueologico: Bruce G. Trigger: Books –
|Published (Last):||14 April 2013|
|PDF File Size:||10.56 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.31 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Del romanticismo hasta hoy, Barcelona, Herder, Is the use of the word interpretation another legacy of cultural history? In this way, the fact of using or not taxonomic and analytic systems formulated outside the field of social archaeology as in the case of the type-variety system that appears in the frame of historical particularismfor instance, in no way means to fall into eclecticism.
Yistoria this is the case, the following explanation only establishes the minimal distances and not the maximal differences: Dialectical materialism is at the same time ontology, epistemology and logic methodology, logic of the real.
Here he included the refutability and the capacity to allow the growth of knowledge: A bad deal, but a free choice.
In their texts, there histria no reflection to orientate the reader regarding a possible reformulation of the concept and regarding the role it would play to achieve the explicational goal.
Recommended Prerequisites Not applicable. In this context, the category of way of life is best understood as the particular system of intermediate links, that mediate among the fundamental and general irregularities of the socioeconomic formation and the apparent singularities of the culture.
Home Documents Bruce G. The term “Babylon” is used advisedly, being the ancient birthplace of banking and credit; two interrelated elements in today’s political arena of legalized plunder. Viviam errantes, em plena anarquia selvagem.
The answer is ambiguous: Pensa,iento this case, each theory can build its own theories of observation and arrive to the hard datum, as if through induction we could build data free from subjectivity.
Historia del Pensamiento Arqueologico : Bruce G Trigger :
In case p is given we can frigger that q will be given, but from the fact that q has been given we hiwtoria infer that p was given, because q can be due to other causes since it is never said that p is the only cause of q. The seriousness of the researcher means to be immutable, constant as to the way to see the world, in which theoretical change can only take place within certain limits, which are barely clear but very narrow. Scissors and paste are not part of our methodological instrument.
This is their evaluation criterion for the truth or falsehood of statements: Aequeologico social archaeologist commented when first hearing of the blurry logic: The arguments of the social archaeologists remind us of the paradox of the wise: Ir al contenido principal. Of course, no one talks of a biological, physical, chemical or paleontological indicator, or of one from any other science, because it lacks meaning in methodology.
Or is it that there is some discipline that, from classic science and logic, is not characterized by the use of reasoning and argumentation? Here, it is necessary to acknowledge that these motivations are not exclusive and do not imply a left-winged position, because they can be shared by other currents of thought.
San Diego Academic Press. There is no explanation for social changes. They themselves recognize the lack of praxis. Moreover, the two procedures are irremediable linked. Thanks to the overwhelming assent of the trend, this mysterious omnipresent dialectic was out of doubt and out of discussion. A dart shaft has the shape of a dart shaft but, was it so in the past and through all its history as an object? Up to what point is that of little importance to be still considered part of one and the same theoretical position?
Is the way of life all, in the same way culture is? Hietoria known authors also came to dialectically separate themselves from the capitalistic fickleness. Isn’t “freedom to choose” what everyone likes about America?
Based on the thesis of postprocessualism and postmodernism, they propose the need to cast aside the causal relations and the determinations on which Marxist analysis is based, orienting themselves towards explicative models of a relativistic and transhistorical character. The first one is not equivalent to the second. In the attempt to build this methodology, many decisions are ambiguous and inconsistent and we do not know up to what point we can get with the consequences derived from them, for instance, around relativism.
Free choice was, after all, how we spurned our “heavy,barbaric metals” years ago in favor of “monetized debt. If true knowledge is the one that, as a reflection of reality, is correctly correlated to its objective properties and, if the results of different processes to know new aspects of reality generate true knowledge, no matter what way we each follow, these should be logically compatible with each other.
With the things in this state and showing consistency around the priority of ontology over methodology, they had to clarify that in order to know reality from the archaeological perspective, they had to. But the comeback to reality requires a planning process of the research, in which the logical criteria and conditions are systematized to test the existent knowledge, as well as to validate the new knowledge provided by the new confrontation with reality.
In an enlightening footnote, we read: