Much of the Middle Ages’ astronomy and geography may be traced back to the claims of Claudius Ptolemy, a Greek mathematician, astronomer, and geographer. He created the first world map with longitude and latitude lines in the second century as part of his book Geography. The concept of a universal coordinate system was revolutionary, and some are still in use today. However, he is most recognized for discovering the cycles and epicycles that allowed the geocentric view of the universe to function for 1400 years. He wrote about it in The Almagest, a book about the movement of the stars and planets (Grčić, 2018). This is the belief that Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton, who lived over a thousand years later, disproved. As a result, Ptolemy is a controversial figure in the history of science. Robert Newton claims that Ptolemy was an astronomical con artist despite being a brilliant scientist.
Ptolemy’s massive 13-book work, The Almagest, contains some interesting information about the planets. Newton claims that he could not have created some of the tables he discusses with the tools he discusses because they are too exact compared to the current ones. The human race as a whole makes numerous errors. Ptolemy, for example, claimed to have computed the autumnal equinox at 2 p.m. on September 25, AD 132, although he was more than a day off (Grčić, 2018). According to Newton, Ptolemy altered observations made hundreds of years before his time by changing the measurements to meet his theories. When asked about Ptolemy’s testable claims, Newton said that some, if not all, of Ptolemy’s hypotheses, appear to be founded on evidence that appears to be fabricated. However, most of Ptolemy’s work was a significant milestone in understanding Geography.
Ptolemy assembled what was known about the universe and what the Greeks believed about it. For more than a thousand years after his death, his writings kept his ideas about the world alive across Europe, the Byzantine Empire, and Islamic countries. Astronomers could better forecast where planets would be and when the sun and moon would eclipse. For example, following the fall of the Roman Empire in 641 CE, Muslim Arabs took over Egypt, with most Muslim scholars acknowledging that Ptolemy’s astronomical theories were correct. They used most of the records by Ptolemy as the foundation for more research in the field. For 1400 years, all astronomers, including Christians, Greeks, and Muslims, followed the Ptolemaic system, with additions and modifications. Famous scientists like Aristotle believed in the geocentric universe and the spherical nature of planets and stars, though the earth was considered an imperfect sphere.
Ptolemy’s Geography concluded with an atlas of maps that employed his grid method and continued the Ptolemaic custom of placing north at the top of the map. Because he had to rely on the best estimations of merchant transit times, Ptolemy’s gazetteer and maps were far from accurate. They were incapable of accurately measuring longitude at the time. Like most old material, Ptolemy’s magnificent work was lost over a thousand years after it was initially written down. His writings were discovered and translated into Latin, the language of instruction at the time, towards the beginning of the fifteenth century. Because geography was so popular in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, more than forty volumes were written on the subject. In the Middle Ages, dishonest cartographers used Ptolemy’s name on various atlases to make them appear more reputable. Because Ptolemy miscalculated the size of the Earth, Christopher Columbus believed he could sail west from Europe to Asia. Ptolemy regarded the Indian Ocean as a huge inland sea bordered to the south by an unknown land. There was a lot of exploration because many felt there might be a large continent in the south. It is good that Renaissance geographers’ knowledge and experience were discovered anew because it led to the development of theories that constitute the foundation of contemporary geography.
Germans had made significant progress and established a firm foothold in the field by the 18th and 19th centuries. They provided both a theoretical and a practical foundation. Following the work of Humboldt and Ritter, the function of universities altered dramatically. Historically, the primary objective of colleges was to teach students things like languages, philosophy, religion, and current law and reasoning. Teachers across the country agreed on a unified curriculum for teaching a variety of physical, biological, and social science disciplines in the mid-nineteenth century. During this period, several geographical societies were founded. These societies created books and learned about their surroundings. During the second part of the twentieth century, geographers from all over the world attempted to develop a unified definition for their field.
German scholars proposed several theories to define the term “geography.” Politics in Europe were turbulent around the middle of the nineteenth century. Military commanders and government officials required maps and charts to understand more about the distinctions in geography and culture in different parts of the world. Geography was made up of all knowledge that could be shown on a map since it was beneficial. Alexander von Humboldt, a German explorer and naturalist was widely regarded as one of the most brilliant scientists of his day. Humboldt’s most important scientific contribution was discovering the links between climate, geography, the environment, and culture. His theories were revolutionary at the time, and climate change researchers today may be able to learn from them. Some appraisals of Humboldt’s scientific impact fail to include how his distinctive maps and scientific drawings influenced his thinking. Humboldt noticed linkages that others had overlooked by displaying material previously displayed in tables.
Humboldt was one of the first scientists to use maps to generate and evaluate theories. He utilized isotherms, for example, to indicate regions where the average temperature was the same. Because these lines are so prominent and accurate, scientists often overlook them while looking at modern weather maps. In 1817, Humboldt used this knowledge to create a map. These graphics challenged scientists’ long-held idea that a region’s average temperature was mostly determined by its latitude. The latitude lines on Humboldt’s map moved up and down, but the isotherm lines did not. In his quest for solutions, he discovered that mountains, ocean currents, and other natural elements influence weather. These findings were significant milestones, setting a foundation for modern geography. Maps that followed were drawn, including latitudes, which led to broadening geography knowledge in weather and climate.
Increased essays, books, revolutions, inventions, and scientific discoveries characterized the enlightenment era. The enlightenment ideas fueled the revolutions in different parts of the world, including French, Germany, and America. One of the areas impacted was Geography which experienced increased research and publication of reading materials. As the demand for geographic information rose, more and more people needed to understand the fundamentals. People were also becoming more aware of how geography may shape national identities by emphasizing how diverse people’s circumstances differed from those of their peers. Unlike the enlightenment era, the geography of the 19th century was based on facts. Scientists such as Humboldt would assess the findings of the enlightenment era and make corrections, setting a firm and accurate foundation for modern geographical studies.
Common knowledge was rejected by Enlightenment intellectuals in Britain, France, and other regions of Europe in favor of the belief that rational change might make people better. The Enlightenment produced numerous materials, brought the world into view, and changed it through maps and text, exploration, and conflict, both within and beyond physical and intellectual borders (Fischer & Withers, 2021). New information was generated and debated, as well as the different tools used to learn more about the world. The process of analyzing the existing materials and more experiments broadened the thoughts of scientists, making them question some findings in later studies. New techniques of portraying the world and its people impacted notions about the nature and growth of human society. Studies of the movements of people and ideas reveal how foreign regions shaped Enlightenment science and the credibility of science.
According to Kuhn, paradigm shifts are what enable scientific progress. A paradigm is a broadly recognized scientific discovery that provides a practitioner community with model issues and their solutions over a set period. It is a set of ideas, beliefs, and methods of doing things on which community members rely. Paradigms set guidelines on how scientists should behave and think when approaching different situations. Scientists will likely accept the status quo until they encounter anything that does not fit (Mair, 1986). When new ideas threaten the existing paradigm, scientists begin to doubt its roots, and as a result, a new one is adopted. The newly adopted is used until discoveries cannot be explained, and the process continues.
Kuhn’s paradigm explains the changes in geography, especially the quantitative neo-positivist geography in the 1950s. The period abandoned the idiographic way of discriminating between areas in favor of a nomothetic method centered on the search for models of spatial structure and phenomena (Reis Junior, 2017). The quantitative revolution played a significant role in developing geography as a distinct subject that investigated things on the earth’s surface about their position. It examined geography through a scientific lens based on statistical methodologies. The goals of this era were to discover universals, create models, and establish methods and theoretical foundations that might be used to create geographic realities.
People used to believe that geography was studying and describing the earth’s surface. However, the definition and purpose of geography have evolved. The purpose was to depict and explain the many geographical events that occurred on the earth’s surface in a clear, structured, and logical manner. The most visible change is the effect of the quantitative revolution, which resulted in changes in the techniques and methods of representing geographical events in a spatial context (Reis Junior, 2017). A group of physicists and mathematicians spearheaded the initiative resulting in the quantitative geography revolution. Its expansion influenced the physical sciences first, then the biological sciences. It was discussed in all social sciences by the end of the 1960s. In the past, examples of this have been found in economics, psychology, and sociology. On the other hand, anthropology and political science do not fit under this category. The purpose of this new method of thinking about geography was twofold. The first was to transform geography from a discipline of storytelling to a field of science (geo + images). The second goal was to examine and explain the spatial patterns that occur due to geographical events logically and objectively. The ultimate goal was to provide a philosophical and theoretical underpinning for geography so that it could become a scientific field.
In contrast to neo-positivism, Vidalian regional geography focuses on specific regions rather than the world as a whole. Bernhard Varen, sometimes known as Varenius, was possibly the first to discuss the distinction between global and local geography in the 1600s. This is analogous to the distinction between general geography and regional geography. In systematic geography, researchers examine how one or more aspects of the human environment or population performance vary worldwide or in a specific location. According to Varenius, general geography primarily concerns common practices and conceptions. Trying to figure out where everything on earth was once thought to be the pinnacle of geography. Over time, the word systematic geography came to refer to all broad-ranging studies, while regional geography referred to more narrowly focused investigations. The systematic sciences that existed at the time prompted systematic geographers to seek universal and comprehensive notions. However, regional geography continues to have a position in specialist study. Classical regional geography aims to combine all the topics covered in systematic geography into a single map. The quantitative neo-positivist geography was a real scientific revolution because it helped fill the gaps left in the field of Geography. Most of the information was based on assumptions, especially because there was no use of quantitative data. However, with the new approach, more accurate methods were discovered and have remained important even in today’s modernity.
According to Max Horkheimer, the typical positivist approach has two flaws. First and foremost, he stated that it did not depict how people communicate with one another. The fundamental criticism leveled with positivism was that it failed to see how much of the social realities it created were not attributed to the objective universe but rather were the result of how people’s minds had been molded by society and history. Positivism disregards the historical and sociological circumstances that influence how social concepts are presented because it does not value the function of the observer in shaping social reality. Positivism created a false picture of the object being researched by making social reality appear to exist independently of the activity that caused it to occur.
Most of positivist geography’s potential responsibilities in a prosperous capitalist society had already been filled by more established social sciences, and criticisms of positivism were well-developed before the field ever existed. Geography has always been at odds with the scientific goals that it has set for itself. On the other hand, people who disagreed with geography’s scientific goals were met with Hartshornean orthodoxy and the end of regional geography. However, most of the more recent and complicated criticisms and much of the movement for positivist geography have come from non-geographers.
Even if positivism was questioned early on, it persisted. When behavioral geographers stated that models should account for the subjective component, they were not criticizing positivism but aided it. Humanists who were stunned by the harsher criticism rejected positivism right away. However, many critics have examined the paradigm’s assumptions and begun with the existing contradictions and illogicalities. All of these objections have one thing in common: positivist science oversimplifies the social reality in which it operates. People desire and cannot have a perfect, objective, value-free geography based on natural sciences. The positivist paradigm holds that science is socially neutral, which is incorrect because science has a very evident social function that influences its methods and results. The greatest location to find these tools is in the social science discipline. The development of social technology is aided by public policy analysis, urban and regional planning theory, behavioral geography, location theory, and the search for meaning, whether motivated by altruism or careerism.
However, many people now consider geography’s methodology and instruments to be the subject’s technology. Technology has always been linked to natural sciences. This could be due to the word technology’s tangible implications. Given the assumptions underlying the categorial paradigm, it is not surprising that the big picture is still being overlooked. Positivism prefers introspective research to pry into other people’s private lives because it necessitates a clear distinction between truth and value, theory and practice, and the pure and the practical. In other words, the positivist paradigm does not guarantee a satisfactory interpretation of geography or other associated historical events. There is a lot of subjective information assumed, and until the information is considered, findings under the approach should remain questioned.
Social sciences must be rethought as technical puzzles before they can be used to solve important societal problems. This demonstrates the importance of science to the world as a whole. The growing gap between science’s technical skills and its ability to solve important problems has caused a crisis of faith and a growing crisis in modern science. This systemic issue cannot be solved by human rights laws that seek to halt research. It is a common misconception that science’s hidden agenda is how to gain control and manipulate the phenomena being studied. Overall, neo-positivist geography was weak because of assumptions and possible fabrication of results. A quantitative method was the most appropriate in explaining the universe’s geography; indeed, further studies showed insufficiencies and corrections were made in the decades that followed.
References
Fischer, L., & Withers, C. W. (2021). Geographical print culture in the German-speaking territories, c. 1690—c. 1815. Journal of Historical Geography, 72, 1-12.
Grčić, M. (2018). The Balkans on the geographical maps of Claudius Ptolemy. Glasnik Srpskog geografskog društva, 98(2), 83-117.
Mair, A. (1986). Thomas Kuhn and understanding geography. Progress in Human Geography, 10(3), 345-369.
Reis Junior, D. F. D. C. (2017). A historiography of Brazilian theoretical and quantitative geography: The “Rio Claro case,” from flourishing to fall. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography.