Uniformitarianism Re-Examined, or the Present is the Key to the Past, Except When It Isn’t (And Even Then It Kind of Is)

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Max W. Dresow
{"title":"Uniformitarianism Re-Examined, or the Present is the Key to the Past, Except When It Isn’t (And Even Then It Kind of Is)","authors":"Max W. Dresow","doi":"10.1162/posc_a_00573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Perhaps no term in the geological lexicon excites more passions than uniformitarianism, whose motto is “the present is the key to the past.” The term is controversial in part because it contains several meanings, which have been implicated in creating a situation of “semantic chaos” in the geological literature. Yet I argue that debates about uniformitarianism do not arise from a simple chaos of meanings. Instead, they arise from legitimate disagreements about substantive questions. This paper examines these questions and relates them to several “forms of understanding” pursued by researchers in geohistory.","PeriodicalId":19867,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Science","volume":"8 1","pages":"405-436"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00573","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Perhaps no term in the geological lexicon excites more passions than uniformitarianism, whose motto is “the present is the key to the past.” The term is controversial in part because it contains several meanings, which have been implicated in creating a situation of “semantic chaos” in the geological literature. Yet I argue that debates about uniformitarianism do not arise from a simple chaos of meanings. Instead, they arise from legitimate disagreements about substantive questions. This paper examines these questions and relates them to several “forms of understanding” pursued by researchers in geohistory.
均变说重新审视,或者现在是过去的关键,除非它不是(即使如此)
在地质学词汇中,也许没有一个词能比均变说更能激起人们的热情了。均变说的座右铭是“现在是打开过去的钥匙”。这个术语有争议的部分原因是它包含了几个含义,这些含义在地质文献中造成了“语义混乱”的局面。然而,我认为,关于均变论的争论并非源于简单的意义混乱。相反,它们源于对实质性问题的合理分歧。本文探讨了这些问题,并将它们与地史研究人员所追求的几种“理解形式”联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Perspectives on Science
Perspectives on Science Arts and Humanities-History and Philosophy of Science
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信