• Prompt: Is it the professional responsibility of all archaeologists to confront and counteract pseudoarchaeology and pseudoarchaeologists (either generally or in their particular area)?  If yes, why?  If no, why not?  If yes, how should the archaeological community (and individual archaeologists) go about confronting and counteracting pseudoarchaeology and pseudoarchaeologists?

Though generally, pseudo-archaeology in a certain sense is thought to be a sub-category of authentic archaeology, there does need to be a clear differentiation made to minimize the notion of historical narratives being mistaken for historical facts. Real history is important for many reasons, one in particular is its importance in helping various cultures understand the practices of their forefathers and foremothers which could aid them in their sense of identity. In my view, yes, it is the professional responsibility of all archaeologists to have the knowledge to confront and counteract pseudoarchaeological claims made general, if not in general, at least in their particular field of study. I believe that it is more so crucial for archaeologists to be able to confront pseudo-archaeologists in their field of study and not necessarily in all realms of archaeology for the simple fact that they may not be an expert in certain areas of archaeology, which would mean that they are unqualified to speak on such topic. It grants more credibility to the prowess of the archaeologist to confront pseudo sciences in a professional manner which is good for their reputations just on a singular level. On a larger scale, making the distinction between real archaeology and fake archaeology can assist in helping people believe more in archaeology. I say that because, due to the two archaeologies being mistaken for one another, a certain segment of people finds it difficult to trust the discoveries made by archaeologists and question the validity of the science of archaeology. This is obviously unfortunate, because a lot of the discoveries made in archaeology are actually true, yet with the prevalence of pseudo-archaeology, the truth may be erroneously attributed as a lie.

I believe that an effective way for the archaeology community to confront and counteract pseudoarchaeology running rampant would be to first and foremost, address the media who cosigns pseudoarchaeology being displayed on televisions and the internet across the world. The various mediums of the media are very influential and can lead the viewer to feeling as if they’ve been enlightened when they’ve actually been lied to. This can lead to a spread in second-hand information, and sometimes once something is said enough, people don’t even question it, they just accept it as fact. In my view, there should be a penalty for pseudoarchaeologists posing as the real deal. This is easier said than done, as there aren’t really many restrictions on freedom of speech. Individual archaeologists can confront pseudo-archaeologists by ensuring that they themselves are on point and understand their field of study well enough to explain the differences between the two. In my view, the most effective way for the archaeology community to inhibit the spread of pseudoarchaeology would be to identify the source that is most responsible for the spread of fake archaeology and confront whoever is in charge of that entity. At the end of the day, people are going to believe what they want to believe and who’s to say that the entity spreading the misinformation will be willing to come to an agreement with the authentic archaeology community. So long as pseudoarchaeologists are able to benefit and profit from their erroneous assertions unchecked, nothing will change.