Abstract
Toby Morrow argues that I (Kuhn 1994) made an error in calculating the utility/mass ratio of retouched tools, and he proposes an "alternative "formula. Unfortunately, Morrow confounds utility per se with ratio of utility to weight, and, as a result, his alternative approach is erroneous. This response to Morrow examines the central issue of how artifact utility is assessed. The main message of my original paper is reaffirmed. Utility/mass ratios eventually begin to decline as artifacts get large, and optimal size ranges can be estimated based on a few simplifying assumptions.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 591-595 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | American Antiquity |
| Volume | 61 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 1996 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- History
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
- Archaeology
- Museology