Bioarchaeology as Anthropology

Scientists' perceptions of their discipline clearly influence how they frame their research agenda. Seeing bioarchaeology as anthropology profoundly affects the problems that capture one's interest, the questions that one seeks to answer, and the methods one uses to resolve them. Bioarchaeology as anthropology reaffirms a worldview that incorporates an intradisciplinary biocultural approach with a cross-cultural perspective. The field is committed to understanding the adaptation and the evolution of social systems. Given the postprocessual rejection of cultural evolutionary theory, rejection of scientific methodology, rejection of culture as a means of extrasomatic adaptation, rejection of culture as a system, rejection of ecological interpretations, and rejection of etic analysis (Johnson 1999), the perspective presented in this chapter may be seen as a defense of an earlier era of scientific anthropology. Emotionally, a rejection of the postprocessual criticism may feel like the best response; however, a reasoned evaluation of the criticism and measured response is a much more effective strategy. This strategy is reflected in Charles and Buikstra's (2001) effective use of "mitigated objectivism" championed by Wylie (1992). I will argue that bioarchaeology as anthropology, by incorporating aspects of the postprocessual and antiprocessual critiques, has positioned itself to make new and significant contributions to knowledge.