The scientific method consists of an objective means of coming to know how the real world works. The scientific model, established upon observation and replication, deals with observable phenomena (the domain of general revelation in theological terminology). This has to do with the issues of epistemology—what can we know and how can we know it? Herein the term “science” refers to a research strategy for the production of physical knowledge and understanding.

So What’s the Fuss?

One does not have to spend much time in biblical archaeology without encountering controversy. There are many ideologies and “isms.” Not all biblical archaeologists employ the scientific method. Whether the discussion is the nature of humanity, creation-evolution, or any historical item in the Hebrew Scriptures there are major disagreements. There are two basic approaches inherent in these matters, one based on application of the scientific methods and other based on philosophical hermeneutics. You might want to consider them both to hone your critical thinking skills and to gain a sense of how scientists and humanists produce knowledge.

Science deals with observable phenomena, a positivist view, with data obtained by objective means capable of replication. Scientific knowledge remains tentative and incomplete. In theory, scientists do not attempt to expound upon “final truths” through their use of the scientific method. Scientific knowledge in general never does deal with ultimate truths. There are scientists, however, such as the late Lewis Roberts Binford (1931–2011) and Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002) who seemed to have no problem promoting their own versions of ultimate truths.

Scientific research involves validating theoretical models and modifying theories. Further articulation of a theory results from the testing of research hypotheses against data and developing new explanations for observed results. The adjustment of a model occurs with a shift of theory resulting in a new theory replacing an old one, e.g., Darwinism replaced by the synthetic theory of evolution.

Scientific theory constitutes the attempt to explain observable phenomena within a specifiable domain of investigation (chemistry, physics, psychology, anthropology). In a more limited sense, a scientific theory as advanced by Binford and his faithful band of followers, is a set of statements permitting prediction of phenomena.

Science for Binford, through application of the research paradigm known as the scientific method involves prediction not description. The simple testing of hypotheses and improving explanations therefore would not be science but description. His science requires specific testable theories and laws useable for prediction.

The archaeological record, the domain of the science of archaeology, has some but quite limited predictive value. It exists as a repository wherein the decaying material remains of ancient beings and civilizations lie. As archaeologists approach their work they encounter raw data from the archaeological record which serves as the source of their evidence. See The Archaeological Record.

With respect to the production of raw data, when then does becomes evidence. As to its inferential value, two technical issues regarding the archaeological record have particular importance. The first deals with data, evidence, and fact as they relate to an acceptable standard of proof (see Data, Fact, & Evidence) and the second with the nature of the archaeological record (see The Archaeological Record).