In previous work we have described the nature of geologic reasoning and the relation between the geological observer and the outcrop which is the object of their study. We now turn to further consideration of the epistemological aspects of geology that have been largely neglected by twentieth century epistemology. Our basic claim is that the experiential facts of geological field work do not fit with a philosophy of science that has evolved out of considerations on the laboratory sciences. Shifting our (...) focus from the lab to the field offers a more embodied, historical, and fallibilistic understanding of geology. (shrink)

“Articulate models” subservient to formal intelligence are imagined to be heterarchies of automata capable of performing the “symbolic (quasi-spatial) syntheses” of Luria (1973), where “quasi-spatial” points to the abstract core of spatiality: the symbol productions, combinations, and substitutions of algebraic reckoning. The alleged cognitive role of internal “topographic images” and of “efference copies” is confronted with this background and denied.