Yes, absolutely, 100%. The postmodernist conception of science is a straw man erected using the most egregious examples of positivism to discredit the entire enterprise. Letting experimental sciences dictate to historical ones what science is is entirely improper. In fact, real 'positivism' exists almost nowhere in the sciences. The postmodern edifice was constructed as a critique of a particular kind of mid-20th century physics that was *already* discredited among physicists by the 60s.
Having said all that, there are a lot of advantages to using the standard experimental techniques in certain disciplines for certain problems. But archaeology sure ain't one of them! :)
Re: Definition/limitation as the essence of Theory
Yes, absolutely, 100%. The postmodernist conception of science is a straw man erected using the most egregious examples of positivism to discredit the entire enterprise. Letting experimental sciences dictate to historical ones what science is is entirely improper. In fact, real 'positivism' exists almost nowhere in the sciences. The postmodern edifice was constructed as a critique of a particular kind of mid-20th century physics that was *already* discredited among physicists by the 60s.
Having said all that, there are a lot of advantages to using the standard experimental techniques in certain disciplines for certain problems. But archaeology sure ain't one of them! :)