Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Diversity in archaeology's social theories is desirable, but factioning of the discipline into antagonistic, paradigm-based camps undermines the scientific enterprise. In order to promote efforts at building bridges between different theoretical programs, this paper examines relationships between behavioral archaeology and evolutionary (selectionist) archaeology. Potential common ground is brought to light, incompatibilities are critically examined, and possible synergies are explored. It is concluded that there is no fundamental reason why these two programs cannot work in concert to achieve the goal of explaining behavioral (or evolutionary) change in human societies. Whether productive relationships can be established between other programs remains to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael Brian Schiffer (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: