The current state of archaeological theory is one of uncritical diversity. Diversity refers to the general consensus that a disparate range of theoretical frameworks can be employed in the investigation of the human past. The problem lies not in the existence of diversity itself, but in its uncritical nature, leading to a situation whereby incommensurate theories are used without an acknowledgement of theoretical assumptions that may have been imported from other disciplines, or that lie latent within previous theoretical formations. An impasse is currently in place in archaeological theory, as debate is stymied by the acceptance of many different theoretical frameworks without the necessity for a process of rigorous critique. In addition to this issue, the perspectives that are predominantly in use within archaeology are primarily epistemological. This in turn has served to further mask the existence of inherent logical flaws and theoretical contradictions, as the ontological is not acknowledged due to the existence of the epistemic fallacy. Many problems in archaeology are therefore out of reach to current theorising, as debate is constrained within the bounds of an epistemological spiral at the expense of a deeper ontological theorisation of archaeological reality.