Not every archaeologist has to devote a significant amount of time to combating pseudoarchaeology. I’m sure they’re all very busy, and not everyone’s specific field of study is closely associated with pseudoarchaeological claims. Generally speaking, though, I believe it’s important for archaeologists as a group to fight against these ideas. The most pragmatic reason for them to do this is that pseudoarchaeology is damaging to the public perception of archaeology. Pseudoarchaeologists promote the idea of “establishment” archaeologists who refuse to consider alternative theories and are hiding “the truth” from us. Countering these ideas, and encouraging real public understanding and appreciation for archaeology, is beneficial because it will attract funding and people interested in going into the field. Besides, there are definitely some bad societal implications attached to pseudoarchaeology. There’s the racism of disbelieving that ancient cultures were able to build large structures, the use of archaeology to construct nationalist narratives, and the denial of science in favor of religious doctrine. Taking a broad view, we would benefit as a society if everyone was able to identify pseudoscience and think critically before accepting improbable claims.
Die-hard pseudoarchaeologists are so convinced of their beliefs that it’s not much use to argue with them directly. The more you deny something, the more they believe it. That’s why I think it’s most important to try to influence ordinary people before they can be taken in by pseudoarchaeology. Maybe it’s impossible to make archaeology seem as cool to the average person as aliens, Atlantis, and other far-fetched ideas, but there are still ways to make it more accessible. Outreach, like the public outreach that MSU’s Campus Archaeology does sometimes, is a great tool. Also, the problem when it comes to pseudoarchaeology is that it is packaged and presented to the public as entertainment in the form of shows like Ancient Aliens and America Unearthed. By contrast, real archaeology is mainly accessible to the public in news stories, documentaries, and other forms that aren’t as exciting. I think it would be great if there was a TV show or something which featured actual archaeologists debunking pseudoarchaeological claims, with accurate science but still presented in an entertaining way. I’m sure it would never be as popular as Ancient Aliens, but I think there’s still an audience out there of more skeptical people who would enjoy it.
I loved your post. While I did take different stances than you on some points, I think that your argument was well constructed and interesting. I did side with you on one of your primary arguments, that being the need for the media to present real archaeology to be as interesting as they do pseudo-archaeology. Especially, when the reality is archaeology is often times more interesting than the pseudo-archaeology that s consistently pumped out in the media. There is a great deal of money given to these pseudo-archaeologists, that could be given to another real research. Additionally, I agreed with your point that pseudo-archaeologists are not known for their reason, and that there is a very slim chance that they would be moved by reason and facts. Therefore, attempting to get them to change their stance based on facts that they have likely already seen, is illogical and pointless. One of your points that I did not consider, when formulating my own argument was the need to refute the notion that the there is an “establishment” side of archaeology. While this idea is categorically untrue, it could create a damaging perception to the public, that would makes the whole field of archaeology look less ethical.