Does not know - does not answer. We are post-procesualist, interpretive or phenomenological: Is there a model to follow?

Abstract

This work is a reflection about the difficulty that exists in integrating into a coherent model, the principal positions included in the post-processual current. Until now, the multiple definitions are not sufficient to explain the post-processual current as is the theoretical interpretative position, as it is derived from the former postulates. It is still difficult to define because it acquired a certain complexity by consisting of numerous diverse theoretical notions. Since 1982 Ian Hodder has maintained that the culture includes a symbolic component, and it opened the door to numerous interpretations and debates, about the subjectivist postulates present in the culture. The pheno-menological position, as one of the subjectivist postulate, analyzes the subjective role of the archaeological records and can deduct from the discourses related to the material culture. In this analysis we try to clarify this problematic using examples stemming from the historical archaeology, particularly the spatial and architectural analysis of González Catán City (Partido de La Matanza) between 1869 and 1910. This phenomenological model allows us to think about of the use of preconceived paradigms and their consequences on the archaeological interpretation. Equally so, the Phenomenological model offers a solution to overcome the interpretive limitations of the archeo-logical records using the introspection, the critic and the reconstruction of the archaeological object.