Replication as Salvation: The Politics of Open Science and the Recurring Allure of Scientism in Deep-Time Lithic Studies

There is a nascent body of literature in deep-time lithic studies that has declared replication as a primary, perhaps an overriding, aim of research, diagnosing the field to be affected by the so-called replication crisis across the sciences, and positioning reproducibility and replicability at the core of what (lithic) science ought to be. This paper examines this emerging debate, its rhetorics, and its underlying normative and epistemological commitments. I caution against the tendency to muster replication as a new-found yardstick or gold standard of scientificity, to conflate science with replication, and to thereby overlook the broader knowledge-making interests and goals of the field as a whole. I propose that current debates on replication are strongly premised on a specific vision of what science is, which not only appears to be anachronistic but also threatens to promote dangerous tropes of scientism and to restrict the scope of lithic inquiry, hence conflicting with core values such as epistemic diversity and justice long deemed central to scientific pursuits. I argue that overemphasizing the demands of replication can therefore have deleterious consequences for lithic studies and that it can only be a token of good scientific practice if mobilized in such a way that it actually supports, rather than curtails, other key normative concerns as well as the diverse knowledge-making projects within the field. I finally contend that an object-oriented understanding of science is at the root of the problem and that replication debates would be well-advised, as recently suggested in the philosophy of Open Science, to invert the directionality of how openness is implemented, putting emphasis on inclusivity rather than on parameters such as transparency and quality.