Professional Ethics
Description: What are the core values of archaeology as a profession?
Here we contemplate the evolution of professional ethics in the field
and appraise the principal contemporary ethical codes of the major archaeological
organizations.
Learning Objectives:
• Categorize the attributes of professions as traditionally applied by sociologists to the "traditional" professions of medicine, law, the ministry, and the military.
• Next evaluate the status of archaeology as a profession in all its diversity using the same criteria. Does archaeology appear to be strongly or weakly developed as a professional field?
• Examine the ethical codes of the principal archaeological organizations.
Readings:
VITELLI, 17-28.
Society of Professional Archaeologists, "Code of Ethics" and "Standards of Research Performance"; Archaeological Institute of America, "Code of Professional Standards"; Society for American Archaeology, Committee on Ethics, "Principles of Archaeological Ethics," in VITELLI, 253-265.
A. Wylie, "Ethical Dilemmas in Archaeological Practice: Looting, Repatriation, Stewardship, and the (Trans)formation of Disciplinary Identity," in LYNOTT, 138–157.
Web sites of professional organizations:
RPA: www.rpanet.org
SAA: www.saa.org
SHA: www.sha.org
1. Introduction to Professional Ethics
a. Ethics: The values by which humans live in relation to other humans, from ancient Greek ethos ("character"). Ethics are concerned with human behavior—good and bad, right and wrong. The term is generally equivalent to "morality."
b. In philosophy, ethics is the study of morality, one of the three traditional areas of philosophy (the others being epistemology, the study of knowledge; and metaphysics, the study of reality).
c. Professional Ethics: These are the norms, standards, and values of specific professions. Professional ethics frequently come into conflict with the general ethical values of non-professionals; in such cases the professional ethics are generally considered to be dominant or overriding.
[Note for Instructors: Ask the students if they can think of any examples where professional archaeological ethics might differ from or conflict with those of the general public. One example is the attitude of archaeologists toward underwater treasure hunting. Many people in the general public are unaware that treasure hunting results in looting and destruction of archaeological context; they think it is adventurous and exciting.]
2. Characteristics of Professions (based on J. C. Callahan,
ed., Ethical Issues in Professional Life [Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1988] and Michael Bayles, Professional Ethics, [Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth, 1981]). Traditional sociological studies of professions
offer a useful introduction to the topic of archaeology as a profession.
The instructor presents the following characteristics of professions,
eliciting examples from the students from among the traditional professions
(e.g., medicine, law, military, ministry). In the next section the students
are encouraged to go through these characteristics and assess whether
or not they think that archaeology "fits" as a profession.
[Note for Instructors: It is helpful to start with the traditional professions that emerged in the 17th and 18th centuries in Europe. In popular culture, of course, everything is described as a "profession," especially in advertising—e.g., "See your mattress professionals. . ."]
a. Specialized Knowledge: Professions involve expertise, a high degree of systematic and generalized knowledge, and have a significant intellectual component. The knowledge and intellectual component are usually evidenced by the possession of advanced degrees, with colleges/universities serving as professional training grounds.
b. Service to Society: The practice of a profession provides an important service to society. The primary orientation is altruistic, at least in theory: it is to society, not to one's own financial interests or advancement. Lawyers, for all their bad reputation in some segments of society, serve the law and are viewed as officers of the court; doctors take the Hippocratic oath and serve the public health. Thus the profession is seen as having a serious practical application in society, involving intellectual efforts coupled with a high degree of responsibility.
c. Autonomy: Professions usually have a high degree of autonomy. They tend to be largely self-regulating and have a virtual monopoly on their practice. This autonomy reflects an implicit public trust on the part of the profession's "clients."
d. Licensing: Usually there is a process of certification or licensing of professionals. This is how society assures itself that the professionals can indeed be trusted and operate without excessive interference. One thinks of the bar examination for lawyers, or doctors required to become members of the American Medical Association.
e. Organization: Professionals tend to be highly self-organized. They form professional societies for the furtherance of their profession and for the dissemination of new information, techniques, etc. They see themselves as part of a professional community.
f. System of Rewards: Professionals are compensated for their long specialized training and their public service through a system of rewards and high status. They are compensated not only monetarily but also through honors, titles, status in society, and prestige among colleagues.
3. Is Archaeology a Profession?
How does the modern discipline of archaeology match up to the characteristics of professions described above? Admittedly, these characteristics are standard elements of the traditional view of professions among sociologists; they are surely too rigid, but they do offer a normative approach to the question of professionalization in archaeology. To most of us, it goes without question that archaeology is a profession—but is it? Several considerations reveal a lack of unity within the field.
a. Distinction between professional vs. avocational. The terminology (and etymologies) are instructive. Professional comes from Latin profiteri, to profess or declare publicly; professionals presumably have knowledge to profess. But ironically the words for non-professionals are ones that have to do with loving the subject matter. Amateur comes from Latin amator ("lover"). Dilettante comes from Latin diligere ("esteem"). Avocational comes from Latin avocare ("call away from"); it is the subject that calls you away from your job because you love it.
b. Many people and groups are interested in the past, and several make their living at it: antiquities dealers, treasure hunters, art historians, to name a few.
c. Archaeological education takes place in a variety of "homes" that have different theoretical and methodological outlooks. Archaeologists are trained in departments of archaeology, anthropology, art history, religion, history, etc.
d. Archaeologists tend to classify themselves according to subspecialization, e.g., prehistorian vs. historical, Classical, Biblical, Egytologist, industrial, underwater.
e. Professional positions for archaeologists also vary tremendously Some are educators in academia, others hold positions in government agencies or in museums. Many are employed in consulting or environmental firms.
f. So is there a single profession of archaeology?
4. Group Exercise: Archaeology as a Profession: With the instructor
acting as facilitator, the students go through each of the six characteristics
of professions presented earlier and evaluate whether archaeology seems
to possess each one and to what degree. Assessments are made through
the experience of the students, and specific examples are solicited.
[Notes for Instructors: Some of the comments and points that emerged in the discussion are presented below by characteristic.
a. Specialized Knowledge: Students were unanimous that modern archaeology requires a high degree of specialized knowledge in the areas of theory, methods, and culture history. Not only is there a daunting knowledge base for each specialization within archaeology, but the discipline also requires substantial skills in many related areas, such as geology, history, scientific applications, etc. The growth of universities as a training ground for archaeologists since the late 19th century has formalized the acquisition of archaeological knowledge. Today many archaeological jobs, such as university teaching, require the Ph.D.
b. Service to Society: Several students asserted that archaeology has an essentially altruistic nature: the creation of knowledge about the human past, and the preservation of archaeological resources, serves society. But some students saw this aspect of archaeology as clearly weaker than some of the traditional professions, such as medicine or engineering. People need doctors to heal them and engineers to ensure the safety of buildings and industry. But who really needs archaeology? Do humans need a past or is archaeology merely a marginal activity in society, little more than a luxury?
c. Autonomy: Students agreed that professional archaeologists had a high degree of autonomy and that in most public contexts, the public put their trust in them. But some examples arose that suggest otherwise. For example, many countries (including the United States) allow non-archaeologists to dig up underwater shipwrecks; archaeologists are not given exclusive control to manage such sites. Some thought this fact showed that archaeology is weaker than, say medicine: surely a voodoo doctor is not allowed to practice medicine in the United States. But others pointed out the plethora of alternative medical approaches in the United States, perhaps not officially licensed like doctors, but commonly used nonetheless (e.g., chiropractic, massage therapy, etc.)
d. Licensing: Only weakly evolved in archaeology, according to most students. For academic archaeologists working in colleges and universities, the possession of an advanced degree (usually, though not always, a Ph.D.) amounts to professional certification or a license. In the public and private sectors, only the fledgling efforts of the Society for Professional Archaeologists (SOPA), recently evolved into the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) comes close, and this group is represented by a minority of practicing, professional archaeologists.
e. Organization: Students agreed that archaeologists were highly self-organized and pointed to the plethora of regional, national, and international societies and organizations. In fact, some thought there were too many and that the abundance of organizations gave evidence of the fragmentation of the profession, rather than its cohesion.
f. System of Rewards: Most students compared the salaries of archaeologists (usually those in academia) to those of doctors, lawyers, and engineers and thought that they were seriously lagging behind the other professions. Coupled with the obvious lack of professional jobs, the students thought the comparison ludicrous. But opinions changed somewhat when other types of rewards were mentioned, such as prestige, honors, and status. Surely a university professor has a certain degree of status in society, even if his or her salary is not necessarily very high. So on this point the students were split.
In going over the list of characteristics, I found it helpful to put them on the board and annotate them as the class considered each one. If it was felt that archaeology possessed a characteristic to a high degree, I put a "+" mark next to it; a "-" was used for a negative correlation, and "+/-" if the verdict was in the middle. The result was a handy table that suggested that archaeology is a strong profession in some ways but not so strong in others.
Depending on time available, the instructor might consider going through the list of characteristics by dividing archaeology into two professional aspects: (1) academic archaeology; i.e., teachers of archaeology; and (2) consulting archaeology; i.e., those who are involved in cultural resource management or preservation efforts full-time. Some interesting differences emerge when looking at the characteristics of archaeology in this bifurcated way.]
5. Professional Standards in Archaeology: This section involves
a class discussion focusing on the development of ethical standards
and codes in modern archaeology, based on a careful reading and discussion
of the relevant texts.
a. Early Efforts: The Society for American Archaeology's constitution and bylaws, 1935 and 1977; the SAA's "Four Statements for Archaeology," 1961.
b. SOPA/RPA: Origins of SOPA; the SOPA, now RPA, "Code of Ethics" and "Standards of Research Performance."
c. SAA's "Principles of Archaeological Ethics."
[Note for Instructors: Students are expected to read all the codes before class. Classroom discussion is based on a detailed reading of the primary texts. Several points can be addressed here. For example, compare the 1961 "Four Statements for Archaeology" with the RPA "Code of Ethics." What do the differences between the two tell us about how archaeology has evolved as a profession since 1961? (The 1961 statements focus heavily on ensuring that archaeologists use proper excavation and recording methods; have a higher degree (M.A. expected, not Ph.D.); avoid buying and selling artifacts (!); and publish their work. There is no mention of responsibility to the public.)
In going through the RPA code, encourage the students to go beyond the often legalistic language and try to imagine situations where a violation might occur. Then discuss the kinds of behavior that would be considered appropriate. Also encourage the students to think about how a violation of the Code might turn into a formal grievance, what evidence would need to be provided, etc.]