Dualism in Geography

The thinking and knowledge of human being is always dynamic which developed over a period
of time under the influence of society, culture, geography, climate and peer group interaction.
All these things can be best understood by analyzing concept of regional synthesis that sphere
of geography is not homogenous and is guided by various sister disciplines which over period
of time create dichotomy and dualism.

Dichotomy means branching of subject into 2 parts- Dualism also stands for dichotomy.
Geographers right from classical period have been dividing subject into 2:- Human and
physical geography. Over a period of time, several dichotomies emerged out of which some are
General Vs Regional geography, Physical Vs Human geography, Historical Vs Contemporary
geography, Study of formal sites Vs Study of functional sites, Deterministic Vs
Spatial/Possibilistic geography.

Dualism and dichotomies in geography

1. General Geography versus Regional Geography

2. Physical Geography versus Human Geography

3. Determinism and Possibilism

4. Quantitative versus Behavioral Geography

5. Idiographic versus Nomothetic

6. Inductive Approach versus Deductive Approach

7. Modernism versus post-modernism

General Geography versus Regional Geography

Bernhard Varen, aka Verenius introduced the dualism of general (Universal) geography and
special (particular) geography, which led to the development of ‘systematic’ and ‘regional’
geography. Thus, Varenius was the first scholar who laid the foundation of the dichotomy of
systematic vs. regional geography.

SYSTEMATIC GEOGRAPHY- The approach of systematic geography isolates particular

elements such as agriculture, industry or transport, and seeks to understand their spatial patterns
and processes which have produced them.

REGIONAL GEOGRAPHY- The approach of regional geography seeks to understand the

unique character of an area as produced by the interaction of human activities and the physical
environment.
After WW-II, Systematic geography is essential analytical whereas regional geography is
essentially synthetic and deals with unique situation and peculiarities. Systematic geography
examines phenomenon at the whole world level like temperature, vegetation, soil, crops,
rainfall, population, and so on. So, theorists like Koppen, Whittlesey, stump, candolle, penck-
all belonged to school of systematic geography.

In contrast to this, if we study landforms, climate , soil, vegetation and superimposed these
physical variables on cultural landscape, this would be a case of regional/physical geography.

In opinion of Barry, the regional and general are not different approaches but extreme of
continuum.

Anuchin the soviet geographer, summarized controversy by saying that systematic geography
cannot exist without regional geography and regional geography cannot be survived without
systematic geography. In brief, dichotomy of systematic vs regional falls and they are
complementary to each other.

Physical Geography versus Human Geography

Dichotomy of physical and human geography is as old as discipline of geography itself. The
Greeks were probably the first who stated and started dichotomy of physical and human
geography.

Hecataeus gave more emphasis to physical geography.

Similarly Eratosthenes and Ptolemy gave more importance to physical geography while Strabo
and his disciples were in favour of human geography.

The scholars who advocated the growth of physical geography are Hecateous, Kant, Humboldt,
Darwin, Davis, penck and L.C. king, where as human geographers such as Herodotus, Ratzel,
Miss semple, Huttington, Ritter, Mackinder, Harris, Burges, carl-o-saur and stamp related to
study of human geography.

Verinus whose Georgraphical Generalis published in 1650 was one of the 1st scholar to
suggest that the universal and special laws can be framed in geography. The laws of physical
geography can be universal, while the special laws can be framed about human society, is
related a work of human geography.

Verinus was the first geographer who divided the geography into general or universal and
special or particular. In the opinion of Verinus, general geography deals with the formulation of
universal laws which are common for the physical geography, while the spatial/particular
geography providing space for regional geography which is more related to human geography
as spatial geography can formulate laws/theories only for particular region as well as for human
geography.
To understand the depth of dichotomy, we may go into historical development of human
geography. Ritter and Ratzel were among early geographers who consider man as an important
agent to change existing landscape. Vidal de Lablache opined that main objective of geography
to study PAYS(region). Pays are ideal units of study and he argued that regional geography is
core of discipline of geography.

In USA, human geography received an impetus from idea put forward by Mark Jefferson’s
central place in the form of primate city concept.

The dichotomy of physical and human geography was sharpened in later parts of 19th century
and 1st half of 20th century. It was under this influence that department of physical geography
and also another department by name human geography in western world and also in Asian
countries like India.

Still some of the geographers considered the main area of geography as to explain variations
in physical attributes of earth surface like landform classi, geomorphology, oceanography,
biogeography and climatology in which universal laws can be formulated. In opposition, a
substantial majority of geographers both in developing and developed countries take geography
as a social science but in general dichotomy of physical and human geography is artificial and
in fact they are not in opposition but complimentary to each other.

Determinism versus possibilism

DETERMINISM is an approach focusing on the effects of the physical environment on man, in

which man was seen as a passive creature moulded by natural forces. The belief that variations
in human behaviour around the world can be explained by differences in natural environment is
known as environmental determinism.

The emphasis of POSSIBILISM is firmly placed on man rather than nature, and in which man
is seen as an active force rather than a passive being.

Determinism is one of the most important philosophies which persisted up to second World
War in one shape or other. The point of view is that the physical environment controls the
course of human action. In other words, the belief that variation in human behavior around the
world can be explained by the difference in the natural environment.

The essence of deterministic school of thought is that the history, culture, living style and stage
of development of a social group or nation are exclusively governed by the physical
environment.

The determinists considers man as a passive agent on which the physical factors are constantly
working and thus shaping his attitude and process of decision making.

The first attempt to explain the physical features and character traits of different peoples and
their culture with reference to the influence of natural conditions was made by the Greek and
Roman scholars.

The determinists of that time were physician Hippocrates, the philosopher Aristotle, the
historians Thucydides, Xenophone, Herodotus (Greek), and Strabo (Roman).

Geographical determinism continued to dominate among the Arab scholars. The divided the
habitable world into seven kishwars or terrestrial zones and highlighted the physical and
cultural characteristics of races and nations of these zones.

Al-Biruni, Al-Masudi, Al-Battani, Ibn-Hauqal, Al-Idrisi and Ibn-Khaldun attempted to

correlate environment with human activities and mode of life.

Al-Masudi, for example, asserted that in land like Sham (Syria) where water is abundant, the
people are gay and humorous, while the people of dryland are rude and short-tempered. The
nomads who live in the open air are marked by strength and resolution, wisdom and physical
fitness.

The environmental causation continued throughout the 19th century when geographers
themselves used to regard geography above all as natural science. Carl Ritter, the leading
German geographer adopted an anthropogenic approach and introduced geographical
determinism in the early nineteenth century. Alexander von Humboldt, one of the founders of
‘modern geography’ and a contemporary of Ritter also asserted that the mode of life of the
inhabitants of a mountainous country differs from the people of plains.

The origin of scientific determinism lie in the work of Charls Darwin, whose seminal book
Origin of species (1859) influenced many geographers.

The founder of the ‘new’ determinism was Friedrich Ratzel. He supplemented classical
geographical determinism with elements of Social Darwinism.

The names of Ratzel and Semple are associated with the most outspoken expression of the idea
of environmental determinism. Huntington tried to seek out objective evidence of the effect of
physical environment, and in particular climate which he regarded as an important influence on
human behaviour.

ossibilism in geography developed as a reaction to extreme generalisations of environmental

determinists that led to a counter thesis, of possibilism, which presented the man as an active
agent.

A historian Lucian Febure and Vidal de Lablache advocated the philosophy of possiblism. The
concept was exclusively associated with French school of Geography.

The idea of possibilism emphasised that the natural environment offers opportunities, the
number of which increases as the knowledge and technology of a cultural group develop.
“Nature sets limits and offers possibilities for human settlement, the way man reacts or adjusts
to these conditions depends on his own traditional way of life.” – Vidal de Lablache

“The true and only problem with the geographical problem is that of utilization of possibilyies.

There are no necessities, but everywhere possibilities.” - Febure

“Nature is not mandatory but permissive”. –Brunhes

Vidal in his studies minimised the influence of environment on the activities of man. Central
to Vidal’s work were the genres de vie (lifestyles).

Barrows, a prominent ecologist gave greater importance to man than to environment.

A more acceptable view of possibilism was presented by Saur. He asserted that geographer’s
role is to investigate and understand the nature of the transition from the natural to the cultural
landscape.

Quantitative geography versus behavioural Geography

In the years immediately following World War II, the American academic community
increasingly stressed the value of the physical sciences and mathematics. Conversely, interest
in the social sciences, arts, and humanities declined. Accordingly, many geographers believed
that in quantitative geography, they had at last found an approach that would eliminate the
ambiguity that seemed to obscure the unifying theme of their discipline. So enthusiastic was
their embrace of “number crunching,” that some less devoted to the cause of quantification
began to refer to the new love affair with creating complex formulae in order to explain the
nature of the world as the “quantitative revolution.”

Whereas many geographers decided that total quantification of their research was mandatory,
others continued to see value in the time-honored expository tradition. For several decades, the
debate raged on. Those in love with quantitative analysis suggested that those who were more
qualitative in their approach were not academically viable. Others, less enamored with the
manipulation of numbers and somewhat suspicious of the outcomes based solely on the
application of mathematical formulae, sometimes suggested that the quantifiers were far more
interested in the manipulation of numbers than they were in explaining the nature of places,
regions, and geographic phenomena.

During the 1970s and 1980s, geographic journals tended to shun publications that were not
based on quantitative analysis, and universities tended to avoid hiring geographers who were
not at least comfortable with advanced statistical methods. In recent years, however, the debate
has waned and geographers seem to have accepted the notion that the discipline is strengthened
by its diversity. It seems there is room for quantifiers and qualifiers within the broad boundaries
of the discipline after all.
It was increasingly realized by the geographers that the models propounded and tested with the
help of quantitative techniques, provided poor descriptions of geographic reality and man and
environment relationship. Consequently, progress towards the development of geographical
theory was painfully slow and its predictive powers were weak.

Theories such as Central Place Theory, based on statistical and mathematical techniques, were
found inadequate to explain the spatial organization of society. The economic rationality of
decision-making was also criticized as it does not explain the behaviour of floodplain dweller,
who does not leave his place despite the risk of flood.

It was a psychological turn in human geography which emphasized the role of cognitive
(subjective) and decision-making variables as mediating the relationship between environment
and spatial behaviour. The axiom of ‘economic person’ who always tries to maximize his profit
was challenged by Wolpert. In an important paper, Wolpert (1964) showed that, for a sample of
Swedish farmers, optimal farming practices were not attainable. He concluded that the farmers
were not optimizers but, in Simon’s term, satisficers.

Environmental Perception and Behaviour (after Downs, 1970)

The behavioural approach in geography was introduced in the 1960s. Its origin can be traced to
the frustration that was widely felt with normative and mechanistic models developed with the
help of quantitative techniques.

These normative and mechanistic models are mainly based on such unreal behavioural
postulates as ‘rational economic man’ and isotropic earth surface. In normative models, there
are always several assumptions, and generally the centre of attention is a set of omniscient
(having infinite knowledge) fully rational actors (men) operating freely in a competitive
manner on isotropic plane (homogeneous land surface).

Behavioural geography banks heavily on ‘behaviouralism’. Behaviouralism is an important

approach adopted mainly by psychologists and philosophers to analyze the man-environment
relationship. The behaviouristic approach is largely inductive, aiming to build general
statements out of observations of ongoing processes. The essence of behavioural approach in
geography lies in the fact that the way in which people behave is mediated by their
understanding of the environment in which they live or by the environment itself with which
they are confronted.

A Conventional Model of Man-Environment Relationship (after Boulding, 1956)

In behavioural geography, an explanation for man-environment problem is founded upon the

premise that environmental cognition and behaviour are intimately related. In other words,
behavioural approach has taken the view that a deeper understanding of man-environment
interaction can be achieved by looking at the various psychological processes through which
man comes to know environment in which he lives, and by examining the way in which these
processes influence the nature of resultant behaviour.

The basic philosophy of behaviouralism may be summed up as under:

The behavioural geographer recognizes that man shapes as well as responds to his environment
and that man and environment are dynamically interrelated. Man is viewed as a motivated
social being, whose decisions and actions are mediated by his cognition of the spatial
environment.

Idiographic versus Nomothetic

The idiographic approach emphasized on the view that all places are unique, and that the task
of the geographer is to describe and explain the differences that exist over the surface of the
earth.

Nomothetic approach is concerned to find similarities between places and phenomena, and
which is a necessary approach in the development of geography.

According to some scholars, geography is an idiographic science, while other consider it as a

nomothetic science. Kant, Hettner, and Hartshorne considered geography as an idiographic
science. He conceived geography as the study of spatial differentiation of phenomena.

Nomothetic sciences deals with general laws. Systematic geography or general geography
comes under this category. Humboldt, Sauer and many other followers laid stress on systematic
geography and the formulation of general laws.
James, while discussing the idiographic and nomothetic approach, declared that there is no
such thing as a ‘real region’. The region exists only on an intellectual concept which is useful
for particular purpose.

After second world war, the geographers concentrated on theoretical issues and prepared
diffusion models, location theory and gravity models as well as geometrical models to explain
geographical patterns. This process has passed the take-off stage and it is hoped that new
nomothetic (general) laws will be formulated which shall put geography on a sound footing
and will bring it greater recognition in sister disciplines.

In an inductive approach to research, a researcher begins by collecting data that is relevant to

his or her topic of interest. Once a substantial amount of data have been collected, the researcher
will then take a breather from data collection, stepping back to get a bird’s eye view of her
data. At this stage, the researcher looks for patterns in the data, working to develop a theory
that could explain those patterns. Thus when researchers take an inductive approach, they start
with a set of observations and then they move from those particular experiences to a more
general set of propositions about those experiences. In other words, they move from data to
theory, or from the specific to the general.

Researchers taking a deductive approach take the steps described earlier for inductive
research and reverse their order. They start with a social theory that they find compelling and
then test its implications with data. That is, they move from a more general level to a more
specific one. A deductive approach to research is the one that people typically associate with
scientific investigation. The researcher studies what others have done, reads existing theories of
whatever phenomenon he or she is studying, and then tests hypotheses that emerge from those
theories.
Modernism versus Post-modernism

Modernism, in its broadest definition, is modern thought, character, or practice. More

specifically, the term describes the modernist movement, its set of cultural tendencies and array
of associated cultural movements, originally arising from wide-scale and far-reaching changes
to Western society in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Modernism was a revolt against the
conservative values of realism. Arguably the most paradigmatic motive of modernism is the
rejection of tradition and its reprise, incorporation, rewriting, recapitulation, revision and
parody in new forms. Modernism rejected the lingering certainty of Enlightenment thinking
and also rejected the existence of a compassionate, all-powerful Creator God.

In general, the term modernism encompasses the activities and output of those who felt the
"traditional" forms of art, architecture, literature, religious faith, social organization and daily
life were becoming outdated in the new economic, social, and political conditions of an
emerging fully industrialized world. The poet Ezra Pound's 1934 injunction to "Make it new!"
was paradigmatic of the movement's approach towards the obsolete. Another paradigmatic
exhortation was articulated by philosopher and composer Theodor Adorno, who, in the 1940s,
challenged conventional surface coherence and appearance of harmony typical of the
rationality of Enlightenment thinking. A salient characteristic of modernism is self-
consciousness. This self-consciousness often led to experiments with form and work that draws
attention to the processes and materials used (and to the further tendency of abstraction). The
modernist movement, at the beginning of the 20th century, marked the first time that the term
"avant-garde", with which the movement was labeled until the word "modernism" prevailed,
was used for the arts (rather than in its original military and political context). Surrealism
gained fame among the public as being the most extreme form of modernism, or "the avant-
garde of modernism".

Present-day perspectives Some commentators approach Modernism as an overall socially

progressive trend of thought that affirms the power of human beings to create, improve and
reshape their environment with the aid of practical experimentation, scientific knowledge or
technology. From this perspective, Modernism encouraged the re-examination of every aspect
of existence, from commerce to philosophy, with the goal of finding that which was 'holding
back' progress, and replacing it with new ways of reaching the same end. Others focus on
Modernism as an aesthetic introspection. This facilitates consideration of specific reactions
tonthe use of technology in The First World War, and anti-technological and nihilistic aspects
of the works of diverse thinkers and artists spanning the period from Nietzsche to Samuel
Beckett.

Postmodernism is difficult to define, because to define it would violate the postmodernist's

premise that no definite terms, boundaries, or absolute truths exist. In this article, the term
“postmodernism” will remain vague, since those who claim to be postmodernists have varying
beliefs and opinions on issues.

Are nationalism, politics, religion, and war the result of a primitive human mentality? Is truth
an illusion? How can Christianity claim primacy or dictate morals? The list of concerns goes
on and on especially for those affected by a postmodern philosophy and lifestyle. For some, the
questions stem from lost confidence in a corrupt Western world. For others, freedom from
traditional authority is the issue. Their concern centers around the West’s continued reliance on
ancient and traditional religious morals, nationalism, capitalism, inept political systems, and
unwise use and adverse impact of promoting “trade offs” between energy resources and
environment, for economic gain.

According to the Postmodern Worldview, the Western world society is an outdated lifestyle
disguised under impersonal and faceless bureaucracies. The postmodernist endlessly debates
the modernist about the Western society needing to move beyond their primitiveness of ancient
traditional thought and practices.

Their concerns, for example, often include building and using weapons of mass destruction,
encouraging an unlimited amount of consumerism thus fostering a wasteful throwaway society
at the sacrifice of the earth’s resources and environment, while at the same time not serving the
fair and equitable socioeconomic needs of the populace.

Postmodernists believe that the West’s claims of freedom and prosperity continue to be nothing
more than empty promises and have not met the needs of humanity. They believe that truth is
relative and truth is up to each individual to determine for himself. Most believe nationalism
builds walls, makes enemies, and destroys “Mother Earth," while capitalism creates a “have
and have not” society, and religion causes moral friction and division among people.

Postmodernism claims to be the successor to the 17th century Enlightenment. For over four
centuries, “postmodern thinkers” have promoted and defended a New Age way of
conceptualizing and rationalizing human life and progress. Postmodernists are typically
atheistic or agnostic while some prefer to follow eastern religion thoughts and practices. Many
are naturalist including humanitarians, environmentalists, and philosophers.

They challenge the core religious and capitalistic values of the Western world and seek change
for a new age of liberty within a global community. Many prefer to live under a global, non-
political government without tribal or national boundaries and one that is sensitive to the
socioeconomic equality for all people.

Postmodernism – Right and Wrong?

Postmodernists do not attempt to refine their thoughts about what is right or wrong, true or
false, good or evil. They believe that there isn’t such a thing as absolute truth. A postmodernist
views the world outside of themselves as being in error, that is, other people’s truth becomes
indistinguishable from error. Therefore, no one has the authority to define truth or impose upon
others his idea of moral right and wrong.

Their self-rationalization of the universe and world around them pits themselves against divine
revelation versus moral relativism. Many choose to believe in naturalism and evolution rather
than God and creationism.

Postmodernism – Politics

Postmodernists protest Western society’s suppression of equal rights. They believe that the
capitalistic economic system lacks equal distribution of goods and salary. While the few rich
prosper, the mass populace becomes impoverished. Postmodernists view democratic
constitutions as flawed in substance, impossible to uphold, and unfair in principle.