The Song of the Science Mermaid: A Philosophical Trilogue on the Osteological Paradox

As a modern academic Ulysses, the historical scientist is enticed by numerous plausible scientific theories that can explain the historical data in search of the truth. However, the predicament of her work is to inevitably crash onto the rocks and cliffs of uncertainty. The problem discussed in this paper is that several scientific models can be suitable to account for the same empirical observations. The risk of falling into speculation is looming, and exceedingly dangerous in science. This is also the case in archaeological sciences, such as bioarchaeology. A bioarchaeologist frequently encounters traces of disease in ancient skeletons, and pertinent patterns may often result from equally probable different causes. This is a methodological issue commonly encountered in the interpretation of pathological patterns in human remains, and constitutes part of the problem known in bioarchaeology as the osteological paradox. During an informal trilogue, three characters discuss the osteological paradox, and attempt to define it in philosophical terms. The aim of this work is to present the problems of scientists with the philosophical approach to the debate between scientific realism and antirealism, focusing in particular on the so-called problem of underdetermination. Our original approach is to apply the distinction between ‘how-possibly’ models and ‘how-actually’ models by Alisa Bokulich to archaeological issues, integrating various fields of science with a multidisciplinary and omnivorous approach. The trilogue ends providing the historical scientist with reasons and means to believe in her ability to conceive of true and reliable scientific models to interpret the historical past.

Hierarchy and Urbanism in Pre-Columbian Central Mexico

The authors reconstruct biological stress patterns in pre-Hispanic urban settings at Teotihuacan in the Valley of Mexico (ca. 150 B.C.–650 A.D.) and at Monte Alban in the Valley of Oaxaca (ca. 100 B.C.–A.D. 500). Archaeologically identified rank (via burial location, mortuary elaboration, and settlement pattern data) was reduced into two broad categories—high and low social status. Odds ratio analyses revealed no difference in overall health patterns by status or sex. In other comparisons, higher status individuals appear to have been buffered against various forms of stress. Overall, Storey and coauthors demonstrate potential expressions of “osteological paradox” outcomes, in that social status and health in urban societies is a complex affair: intervening factors (population density, nutrition, and hygiene) structured by an urban setting can crosscut social strata and exert more influence on health than social organization alone.