The Kennewick Man Controversy

The Kennewick Man inclination has been an issue debated among scientists and the Umatilla phratry. The debates focused on the motion of who should take ownership and immediate self-command of a human skull found at the edge of the bank of the Columbia River. Archaeologists pointd for a right to nurture the human skull, create the legal battle to stretch for some(prenominal) years until scientists were allowed to hire the Kennewick Man.The break done of the skull paved the way for realizing the urgent privation for archaeological analytic thinking and gave rise to trusted ethical contentions which drew the lines between scientific and ethnic pursuits. In this paper, I argue that archaeological issue is an immediate strike that should overcome certain ethical and ethnic considerations for a specific duration. There argon scientific limitations and ethical issues raised by the debates over the Kennewick Man. Scientists arguing for the right to study the human skull ar hold in by an existing law of the United States the essential the Statesn Graves and Repatriation Act.Also, once scientists are permitted to study the human skull, their studys space will be limited non yet by their scientific tools but too by the consumes of the Umatilla family line to take possession of the mud the soonest possible time. One of the results of the scientific study conducted reveals that the Kennewick Man did not fit any of the modern classifications of race and that more is yet to be known about the identity operator of the human skull (Fiedel, p. 86). As far as ethical issues are concerned, the controversy has turned on(p) the delicate balance between the richness of scientific research and the respect for cultural beliefs.The major point raised by the archaeologiststhat the human skull regarded archaeological outline in order to solve the drumcame in conflict with the contention of the Umatilla commonwealth, which is that they behave a claim to the bones and, therefore, it is lonesome(prenominal) proper to repatriate the bones to them. On closer inspection, the granting of the permission of the archaeologists does not of necessity imply the higher signifi toilettece of scientific analysis over the cultural rights of the Umatilla tribe in general.Permitting archaeologists to examine the remains entirely signify that there is an urgent need to study the skeletal veridical. The fact that the law forces the scientists to return the artifacts after trial run signifies that, in the long run, the ethical considerations for the cultural rights of the Umatilla tribe silent weighs more than scientific pursuits. Elizabeth Weiss argues that the demand to bury aboriginal skeletons, not only in America but also around the demesne, poses a potentially heartbreaking impediment to scientific inquiry (Weiss, p.13), to which I fully agree. While we should consider the cultural rights of native groups to their heritage and cultura l property, the examination of archaeological findings to expand the human arrest of human civilizations development is likewise a significant function to consider. Legal arrangements can be make in order to preserve the impartiality of the skeletal material during archaeological analysis under a prescribed length of time and to guarantee the claimants of the skeletal remains that they will have possession of the objective lens after the study.To this day, modern scientists are still seeking the humble beginnings of existence through what is little that remains of it, from aboriginal skeletons to historical objects. When archaeologists and the larger body of scientists across the world are prevented from examining such materials from the past, there is savvy to believe that it will similarly peel future generations of knowing and understanding the past.The sterling(prenominal) threat is when these objects eventually get interred in time, forgotten and never to be seen aga in the result is catastrophic because humanity will have no crusade to mount attempts to study human tale. mob Chatters also writes that most of the analyses and interpretations about the peopling of America and where the immigrants came from are limited by the comminuted sample of ancient skeletal material (Chatters, p. 291).Thus, scientists should not be deprived of perusing ancient skeletal materials once they are found. The more objects we can study, the more we can unveil a hidden history and the more we can know and explain how human civilization has evolved. Cultural concerns should not be abandoned, yet the primacy of scientific study should also compel us to at least suspend our ethical judgments for a moment and allow science to uphold us understand our world.Bibliography Chatters, James C. The convalescence and First Analysis of an Early Holocene world Skeleton from Kennewick, Washington. American Antiquity 65. 2 (2000) 291-316. Fiedel, Stuart J. The Kennewick F ollies New Theories About the Peopling of the Americas. Journal of anthropological Research 60. 1 (2004) 75-110. Weiss, Elizabeth. Kennewick Mans Funeral The Burying of scientific Evidence. Politics and the Life Sciences 20. 1 (2001) 13-18.