How our society works: an educational example...

This Friday's post was supposed to be an introduction to anarchism  (or how I view anarchism and anarchistic theory), however, I feel the need to respond to a post that I came across during the day yesterday, as such, please forgive this fully OpEd digression:

Recently there has been a popular social media post1 going around about an economics professor that used grade equalizing to “prove” that “Obama’s socialism” does not work.


What this professor did was to say that the test grades in the course would be used to represent money and that he (the professor) would average every student's test grades after every test and whatever the average for the whole class was, would be the score for that everyone in the entire class would receive for that test grade. 

As the semester went on the grades kept getting lower and lower and in the end everyone in the class failed the course, apparently “proving” that a government (represented by the professor) cannot simply demand equality and average income because, as we saw, everyone would "fail".

While this may, at first, seem like a very simple, logical, and inspiring lesson, there was one main thing that this professor failed to note (or chose to omit - which seems to be a common symptom with people who like to teach people lessons). This professor did not bother to actually structure the class as a society, and more importantly, did not bother to structure the class like our society. Which means that his grade equalizing model was not tested on a correct structure.

To fix this problem, I present to you:

How Our Society Works: an educational example


Here is what the professor (or any professor) should have done to really test what is going on within our society:


The first thing that should have been done is for the professor to split his class into different assigned groups and teach then to teach each of the specific groups on different days of the week.


The first group, being taught on the first day of the week, would consist of about 1/3 of the male students in the class and about 1 or two females. This class would be taught with the professor’s full ability; a full syllabus with all rules, expectations and deadlines is handed out, sample assignments given out, homework question-and-answer sessions, and even a tutor to help outside of class hours.


The second group, being taught on a different day of the week, would consist of another 1/3 of the male students, and about 1/2 of the female students. This class would be taught the basics of the course, but nothing too in depth, only a syllabus with deadlines is handed out, no sample assignments given out, and if a student had any questions about anything the professor would suggest making an appointment to meet during his office hours, when the professor might be available.


The third group, being taught on the last day of the week, would consist of all but two of the last 1/3 of the male students, and all but two of the last 1/2 of the female students. This class would not be taught by the professor, but would instead be taught by a first year graduate student who doesn’t actually understand the material, there is no syllabus and no sample assignments, the class would only be about 15 minutes, and anyone in this class was only allowed to ask the graduate assistant questions about anything, and only in class.


The fourth group consists of two male students and two female students. This group is not allowed to come into class and can only contact the graduate assistant for help (if they can find out who the graduate assistant is since they are not getting a syllabus because they are not allowed in class).


Then, after ensuring that the class has been divided as noted above, the professor would proceed to give the exact same assignments to all four groups, the exact same exams to all four groups, have the exact same expectations and deadlines for all four groups, and would thus grade all of the students on the exact same scale.


This is the structure of our society that we, in the United States, and much of the West, have now.

Furthermore, if we really want to give an example of "Obama's socialism" (which is a bit ludicrous because President Obama is, like all other Democrats and Republicans, a devout capitalist) using the classroom as an example, what the professor should have done is to provide more assistance to those who need more help to get better grades, not just equalize the grades...no politician will ever vote to have their money taken away!

---

1 - below is the entirety of the post copied from a facebook post yesterday (February 23, 2013)

“An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Can you think of a reason for not sharing this?

Neither could I.”

Archaeology: a definition

Archaeology: ar·chae·ol·o·gy [noun] \ˌär-kē-ˈä-lə-jē\

1: the scientific study of material remains (as fossil relics, artifacts, and monuments) of past human life and activities.1

To properly situate this blog I feel that it is necessary for me, as the moderator of our future discussions, to give a brief definition, or at least my definition, of archaeology. I will say now that the definition I am about to present is two things: 1) very general - there are some amazing syntheses of archaeology's history out there2 which include the full breadth and depth of what archaeology actually is, and the blog is not necessarily the proper format to do this history justice; 2) it is my personal opinion - I am only highlighting what I find to be the key aspects of the field of archaeology will no doubt skip many things that others will find important3.

As we saw in my first post, one of my main agendas with this blog is to properly situate archaeology in the vast mind of the public. This is no mean feat, especially considering that there are a number of fairly popular images of the archaeologist that have been peddled through the media. The most obvious example that all archaeologists have to encounter within their careers is that of Indiana Jones4. At some level we cannot completely say that the image presented is inaccurate. When one puts the archaeology of Indiana Jones (movies 1 and 3 because, lets be honest, it would be better if movies 2 and 4 simply did not exist) into historical context it is actually hard to discern the differences from what was shown in the movies to major archaeological projects that were being conducted during that time. As we will see in a minute and in future posts, one of the main facets of archaeology is the study of things, and for earlier archaeology, these things usually meant large things, such as pyramids, ancient cities, and the like.

Unfortunately, this image of the relic hunting and city finding archaeologists from the 1930’s has not changed much in the mainstream media. Other more modern characters such as Benjamin Gates from National Treasure5, or Flynn Carson from The Librarian: Quest for the Spear6, or even the notorious Lara Croft “Tomb Raider” of both videogame and movie fame7, are not much better, if not worse. There are two things that all of these characters have in common: 1) they are focused on finding very specific artifacts and 2) they really could care less about context.

Trowel

To be very honest, however, if a major motion picture or video game were to come out that were actually based around true archaeology...it would flop....badly. Real archaeology, archaeology that is actually practiced by real archaeologists (both professional and amateur) is a very slow and careful process that involves digging mostly with trowels (see image) and not shovels (but shovels are still used), and everything (and I do mean everything) is recorded. So our first order of business then is to throw out these images of the pot-hunting, careless relic-chasers and to replace it with an honest definition of archaeology.

Let us begin by looking at the dictionary definition of archaeology presented at the beginning of this post. While the above definition is a very bare bones definition of archaeology it does highlight the main aspects that make up the core of what archaeology really is. First and foremost, archaeology is the study of the human past (thus, no dinosaurs) and from the time of it’s inception up until the 1970’s, one of the main methods that archaeologists used to study the past was through what we call “material culture.”

Material culture, for lack of a better word (or not) is essentially stuff. So when archaeologists say material culture, we are talking about all of the stuff that humans have left behind at any time, before today8 (which is where the pot-hunting, relic-chasing myth comes from). Some varied examples of material culture (other than pots and relics) that archaeologists study are stone tools (lithics),9 Spanish trade beads,10  or the various forms of ceramics that have been made all over the globe11, or even (as with our friend Indy) temples, pyramids, and other large structures12.  Since around the 1970’s, however, archaeologists have broadened their scope. We no longer just focus on stuff and we now study everything about the past, from past environments13, past food sources14, and even how humans affected the landscape itself15.

So what does all of this mean? Essentially, the modern archaeologist, historic or prehistoric, new world or old, now studies past human interactions. We study how humans interacted with their environments, interacted with other plant and animal species, interacted with each other, and, of course, how the interacted with all the stuff that they left behind. There is still a large amount of material culture analysis and we are all in our own way quite nerdy (thinking here of Indy, Benjamin, and Flynn here) but no good archaeologist only focuses on one targeted artifact or temple anymore. More and more, archaeologists are combining methods, theories, and evidence from multiple fields to paint a more complete, context-rich, picture of our human past.

Thus, to be a good archaeologist one must become, in some ways, a jack-of-all-trades who is willing use information and methods not just from within archaeology, they must be willing to get a little dirty, spend time in the library, and most importantly NOT get involved with Nazi’s!



Notes:

1 - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/archaeology , accessed February 14, 2013.

2 - the following are in my opinion very good histories of archaeology or archaeological theory as a whole or of certain aspects of archaeology’s history.

Fagan. B. 2006. A History of Archaeology: Classical Times to the Twenty-First Century. Pearson Publishers.

Hegmon, M. 2003. “Setting Theoretical Egos Aside: Issues and Theory in North American Archaeology. American Antiquity 68(2):213-243.

Thomas, DH. 2000. Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology, and the Battle for Native American Identity. Basic Books.

Thomas, DH. and Kelly, R. 2006. Archaeology: Down to Earth, 3rd Edition. Cengage Learning.

Trigger, B. 2004. A History of Archaeological Thought, 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press.

3 - every researcher, in every field (even the hard sciences) has their own definitions and ideas for their field and for what their field means to them and to humanity at large. It is always important to be able to both recognize and acknowledge these biases, especially when putting one’s research out into the world.

4 - Indiana Jones: Raiders of the Lost Ark major motion picture, released in the United States in 1981. Directed by Steven Spielberg and released by Paramount Pictures and Lucasfilm Ltd.

Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade major motion picture, released in the United States in 1989. Directed by Steven Spielberg and released by Paramount Pictures and Lucasfilm Ltd.

5 - National Treasure major motion picture released in the United States in 2004. Directed by Jon Turteltaub and released by Walt Disney Pictures.

6 - The Librarian: Quest for the Spear made for TV movie released in the United States in 2004. Directed by Peter Winther and released by Turner Network Television (TNT).

7 - Lara Croft: Tomb Raider major motion picture released in the United States in 2001. Directed by Simon West and released by Paramount Pictures.

Tomb Raider major market video game released in the United States in 1996. Produced by Core Design.

8 - already I am showing my bias! I have been very specific in my use of a certain definition, namely that archaeology deals with the stuff left behind before today. For the longest time archaeology was “supposed” to be that of our past, with the definition of past being before our lifetime. I, however, subscribe to the notion that our pat starts yesterday. Thus, those that are studying the remains of the lunar lander on the moon, or the left-over debris on Mars are indeed archaeologists study the human past.

9 - Odell, GH editor. 2009. Archaeological Lithic Analysis, Readings from American Antiquity and Latin American Antiquity. Society for American Archaeology Press.

10 -  Blair, E., LS Pendelton, and P Francis Jr. 2009. The Beads of St. Catherines Island. American Museum of Natural History Anthropological Papers, Number 89.

11 - Neff, H. 2005. Ceramics in Archaeology, Readings from American Antiquity and Latin American Antiquity. Society for American Archaeology Press.

12 - Webster, D. 1999. “The Archaeology of Copan, Honduras.” Journal of Archaeological Research 6(4):1-53.

13 - Anderson, DG, KA Maasch, and DH Sandweiss. 2007. Climate Change and Cultural Dynamics: A Global Perspective on Mid-holocene Transitions. Elsevier.

14 - Schroedl GF and T M Ahlman. 2002. “The Maintenance of Cultural and Personal Identities of Enslaved Africans and British Soldiers at the Brimstone Hill Fortress, St. Kitts, West Indies.” Historical Archaeology 36(4):38-49.

Stahl, PW. 2003. “Pre-columbian Andean Animal Domestications at the Edge of Empire.” World Archaeology 34(3):470-483.

15 - Branton, N. 2009. “Landscape Approaches in Historical Archaeology: The Archaeology of Place.” International Handbook of Historical Archaeology, Majewski, T and D Gaimster ed. Springer.

By way of introduction....

Hello all! And welcome to my first real foray into the wide world that is blogging. This first post will act as more of an introduction rather than be an actual reflection of what is to come (though obviously the tone and temper of what is to come can be reflected in how I am writing now…). I do intend for this blog to be more academic than whimsy, but this being a blog, and a personal blog, there will obviously be more pointed pieces, opinions, and the occasional bouts of whimsy because to quote the great Sheldon Cooper “what’s life without a little whimsy?”^1,2

Thus, with this being an introduction, I shall begin by briefly introducing myself.

My name is Martin Walker and, not unlike many others, I have spent much of my life in school, obviously starting like all others around the age of 5 and working my way through two undergraduate degrees³ (I had a change of heart but didn’t have the courage to change until after I had graduated), and am currently working on a masters degree.

After the long and arduous journey that has been my academic life, I have finally settled upon studying what I have always found to be the most interesting of topic of all, the study of human interactions. The way in which I have chosen to study human interactions is through the field of anthropology, and more specifically through archaeology (thus where the first part of the title for this blog originates).

While I would love to spill some ink here properly defining archaeology (spoiler alert: this will be the next post) I will refrain and simply say that archaeology is not, I repeat NOT, digging up dinosaurs. Now, to be clear, like all those children who grew up in the generation of Jurassic Park⁴ and The Land Before Time⁵, I love dinosaurs. I do. Really. However, I cannot count the number of times where I have a conversation that goes something like this:

                 

                         Anyoneotherthananarchaeologist: “So what do you do/study?”

                                                                 

                                                                 Me:         “Archaeology”

                

                          Anyoneotherthananarchaeologist: “Cool! So you dig up dinosaurs?”

These conversations have left a slight chip on my shoulder when it comes to dinosaurs and how the public defines archaeology, which is part of what I hope to rectify with this blog.

The other lens with which I hope to study human interactions is through the practices and theories that have been developed within anarchism (thus the origins of the second portion of this blog’s title). Again, I will not spend much time here defining anarchism (spoiler: the post after the upcoming archaeology post), but I do wish to say that despite the recent fad that is developing around anarchy, it is my opinion that many do not really know what the term actually means or represents. The public definitely has their opinions, as we shall see (so stay tuned!) but these opinions are a lot farther off the mark than they should be. Fixing this is another main goal of this blog.

So, what should you, the reader of this blog, be expecting to see in the future of this blog? In short, this blog will hope to highlight advances in both the topics of archaeology and anarchism as well as correcting the misconceptions surrounding both of these topics, AND attempting to make both of these topics more accessible to the general public. There will be parts of this blog that will be shameless self-promotion of my own research and the research of friends and colleagues. I hope to balance this, however, with updates and reviews of each of these topics in the more broad sense as well as hopefully developing discussions within and between these topics.

So without further ado! I bid you Welcome to my blog and I hope you stick around to read, learn, and discuss (INTERACT) with me in Archaeology, Anarchism, and other Articles!

Endnotes

1 - “What is this?” you ask! Well my friends, this is an endnote citation. Get used to seeing these because I will be properly citing people, sources, etc. as much as I can to ensure that: 1) I am not making stuff up, 2) I give credit where credit is due, and 3) to illustrate that the web can be a place of reference and discussion above and beyond pictures of cute kittens or daily reports of personal lives.

I will also use these notes to further illustrate points (as I am doing now) or to add additional information or opinions that are either not necessary to piece I am writing or are more my personal opinions, or both. So make sure to read this if you want to fully experience my blog in all of it’s glory.

2 – For those not in the know, Sheldon Cooper is a character on the popular sitcom The Big Bang Theory that is currently being aired on CBS. This quote is from the episode “The Lunar Excitation” that originally aired in the Unites States on May 24, 2010.

3 – For those that might be interested in my credentials, or for those that like to e-stalk people, I have a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Manhattan College (www.manhattan.edu) where I also received two minors, mathematics and English literature. I also have a Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology from Herbert H. Lehman College, CUNY (www.lehman.cuny.edu) where I concentrated in archaeology. I am currently, as of this post, working towards my Masters in Anthropology at the University of Tennesse, Knoxville (www.utk.edu).

4 – Jurassic Park, major motion picture, released in the Unites States in 1993. Directed by Steven Spielberg and released by Universal Pictures… a classic.

5 – The Land Before Time, major animated motion picture, released in the Unites States in 1988. Directed by Don Bluth and released by Universal Studios…also a classic AND a must see…with tissues.