Descriptive Statements, Covering Laws, and Theories in Archaeology [and Comments and Reply

Abstract

The paradigm for explanation in archaeology presented by the "new archaeologists" is reviewed and shown to need further elaboration. It is argued that that presentation has overemphasized the form of explanatory arguments and insufficiently considered their content. Not all explanatory arguments provide intuitively satisfactory explanations of particular observations. Instead, intuitively satisfactory explanations require general theories which systematically relate specific instances. An example of such a theory applicable to archaeological data is then constructed.