My contribution focuses on the relationship between theory and praxis, since the task of a “critical archaeology” is to mediate between these two spheres. Its target audience is the public, not other scholars. Critical archaeology is not part of scientific practice, but rather is part of intellectual reasoning that is both value-laden and that exercises practical critique. Respect for the specific logics of theory and praxis is crucial for its success. A “critical archaeology” that merits its name must steer its way between the Scylla of a technocratic paternalism that limits praxis and the Charybdis of submis - sion to theory under the presumption of the “relevance of praxis.”
