A dialogue between science and conservation: another naïve exploration in response to Salvador Muñoz-Viñas

This article is a response to Salvador Muñoz-Viñas' 2022 article in this journal, 'Conservation science, conservation practice and the conservator's knowledge: a naïve exploration'. In his article, Muñoz-Viñas outlines 46 questions related to a conservation treatment that, we are told, cannot be answered by using the scientific method. This forms the basis for a vindication of the value of the knowledge of conservators, as well as a critical exploration of the limits of heritage science. In my response, I also present a list of questions related to a hypothetical scientific experiment. I have chosen questions that cannot be answered by science alone, because they require the expertise of conservators. In that way, I showcase a heritage science that respects the tacit knowledge of conservators, indeed, that depends on it. Essentially, the way we ask questions shapes the way we answer them. I argue that we must ask inclusive questions that help us collaborate across perceived disciplinary boundaries. The limitations of heritage science identified by Muñoz-Viñas are genuine, but we disagree in the attitude we should have in front of them. Interesting research happens only at the limits of scientific knowledge, precisely where heritage science has the most acute need for the knowledge of conservators.