The paradigm concept in archaeology

Datos Bibliográficos

ID3198231
AutoresGavin Lucas (0000-0003-1619-7955, University of Iceland, autor de correspondencia)
Año2017
Volumen49
Número2
Páginas260-270
Fecha de publicación2017-03-15
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaWorld Archaeology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0043-8243 • E-ISSN: 1470-1375
EditorialInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00438243.2016.1252688
OpenAlexW2560213435
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas15
Referencias citadas39

One of the most critical ideas to bridge the theoretical and historiographical domains is the paradigm concept. From Thomas Kuhn’s highly influential studies on the history and philosophy of science in the 1960s, the paradigm concept was taken up in most if not all disciplinary discourses by the late 1970s and early 1980s, archaeology included. Historically, it provided a framework within which to understand the development of disciplinary questions; theoretically, it was used to frame what were considered to be deeply incompatible philosophies of archaeology, most notably expressed in the processual-postprocessual wars of the 1980s. Now that the dust of these wars has settled however, now that we have had numerous expressions of a consensual pluralism, is the paradigm concept still useful? This paper aims to take a new look at the paradigm concept, and explore it in relation to the intersection of historiography and theoretical debate

Archaeology · Geography · Sociology · Academic Research and Education Studies · Anthropology · Economic, financial, and policy analysis · Education, Healthcare and Sociology Research · History