ABSTRACT
Is debate worth all the effort? As we have seen, it is very difficult to pursue in archaeology, and antagonists rarely perform at very admirable levels. Why not “clean up” our journals and acknowledge that Guppies are correct? Debate is really rather unpleasant and a behavior appropriate only, if at all, to the youth eager to make names for themselves. I have touched upon the other side of the coin with regard to the characteristics of various participants in debate. Is this not really an admission that Hodder’s characterizations of individuals is really accurate, that their motives explain their actions, that we are endlessly engaged in power negotiations, that we live in a world of charlatans of self-interest, that objectivity is a myth, that science is a facade?
