The Scientific Character Ofgeology

7/27/2019 The Scientific Character Ofgeology

1/12

The Scientific Character of GeologyAuthor(s): R. W. van BemmelenSource: The Journal of Geology, Vol. 69, No. 4 (Jul., 1961), pp. 453-463Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30058272

Accessed: 08/01/2010 10:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The

Journal of Geology.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/30058272?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpresshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpresshttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/30058272?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESTHE SCIENTIFIC CHARACTER OF GEOLOGYL

R. W. VAN BEMMELEN2Wer als Geologe lange Jahre mit der Natur allein und intim verkehrt, findet sichimmer hijufiger und deutlicher in eine Zwiesprache versetzt, bei welcher sich der anderestets als der Gescheitere herausstellt.-H. CLOOs,Einfiihrung in die Geologie, 1936,p. 2. ABSTRACT

In this paper the scientific character of geology is discussed by analyzing the very nature of the interroga-tion of the earth by the geologist.Geology differs from physics, chemistry, and biology in that the possibilities for experiment are limited.As geology is essentially a historical science, the working method of the geologist resembles that of the his-torian. This makes the personality of the geologist of essential importance in the way he analyzes the past.This subjective element in geologic studies accounts for two characteristic types that can be distinguishedamong geologists: one considering geology as a creative art, the other regardinggeology as an exact science.Next, the nature of the earth, object of geological studies, is considered. The increasing number of factorsplaying a role in the various complexes of natural phenomena are the origin of new, so-called emergent, lawsand characteristics. Based on this principle of emergence, a hierarchy of sciences can be distinguished: phys-ics-chemistry-geology-biology-psychology.The geologist applies a certain number of general views and concepts which are the rules for his scientificpractice. Such premises, however, are less fixed than the natural laws postulated by the basic sciences ofphysics and chemistry. The geologist is therefore forced to test the validity of the greatest possible numberof presuppositions (method of multiple working hypotheses).The principle of uniformitarianism and the method of comparative ontology are examples of geo-logic rules.The relations between geology and its sister sciences are shown in figure 2.Finally, the tremendous possibilities of future expansion of geology are indicated.INTRODUCTION

The working methods of geological sci-ence may be dealt with in several ways. Itcan be approached from a historical point ofview by giving a general review of the de-velopment of geological concepts and theo-ries. We might consider, for instance, theway in which ideas concerning concrete sub-jects, such as granite or basalt, haveevolved during the course of time. The his-torical revolution of these concepts is a col-lective study by scientists throughout theyears, in which new theories were mere de-velopments of preceding theories with someadded observations. Glangeaud (1949) hastermed this procedure dialectique col-lective.From a historical point of view a change

1Manuscript received July 7, 1960.2 Mineralogical Geological Institute of the StateUniversity, Oude Gracht 320, Utrecht, Netherlands.

may be noted in the way science has beenpracticed. In the heroic period after theRenaissance, science was mainly developedby a number of brilliant individuals whowere far ahead of their contemporaries. To-day the tendency may be perceived to co-operate, to aim the collective efforts of ateam at a common goal. For instance, theAtomic Energy Commission in the UnitedStates, the research laboratories of the bigindustries, the scientific congresses with acentral theme of discussion, etc.We could equally well consider the tech-nical development of the means of research.For instance, the introduction of the polari-zation microscope had an enormous bearingon geology, for it enabled the study of themineralogical composition and internalstructure of seemingly opaque rocks. Themodern computing machines and electronicdevices will certainly promote the develop-ment of geophysical sciences.

453


3/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESHowever, in this paper we will not discussfurther these aspects of geology. We want tofocus the attention on the methodology of

the interrogation of the earth by the ge-ologist.

WHATIS SCIENTIFIC ESEARCH?Geology is part of that remarkable dy-namic process of the human mind which isgenerally called science and to which man isdriven by an inquisitive urge. By noticing re-lationships in the results of his observations,he attempts to order and to explain the in-

finite variety of phenomena that at firstsight may appear to be chaotic. In the his-tory of civilization this type of progressivescientist has been characterized by Prome-theus stealing the heavenly fire, by Adameating from the tree of knowledge, by theFaustian ache for wisdom.The scientist who is thus driven by thepowerful urge to know how nature worksmay well leave the questions of ultimatereality and truth to philosophers and theo-logians. The scientist studies the phenome-na perceptible by his senses. He justsearches for any relationships between phe-nomena. His experiences are his intimateknowledge which his mind tries to transforminto symbolic knowledge, either that of lan-guage or that of mathematical formulas (SirA. Eddington, 1929). If the supposed re-lationship is sufficiently confirmed by re-peated observations, his striving is rightlysatisfied (to a certain degree). It is then pos-sible to talk in terms of statistical probabili-ties or the correctness of the acquired knowl-edge. In other words, an empirical law or ruleof nature is discovered.

For the younger scientists the word sci-ence generally has become a synonym fororganized human knowledge.

A by-product of the free pursuit of scienceis an insight as to the optimal possible ac-tions concerning certain objectives, eithershort-term political and economical actionsor the long-term realization of certain ideals.This means the distinction between appliedscience and pure science or, similarly, ap-plied geology and pure geology.

Exact science in its accepted sense is afamily of specialized natural sciences, eachone of them a study of different aspects bymeans of somewhat different working meth-ods. Mathematics in its pure sense wouldnot enter into this frame, as its object ofstudy is not nature itself; independent of allobservations of the outside world, it at-tempts to build logical systems based onaxioms. In other words, it formulates thelanguage of mathematical symbols andequations which may be applied to thefunctional relations found in nature. Thismathematization by applied mathematicsis most advanced in physics, which is en-gaged in general laws of matter and energyon subatomic, atomic, and molecular levels.Chemistry builds further on the physicallaws and studies the structural bonds be-tween the elements of matter.

Both physicist and chemist are in a posi-tion to experiment with the objects of theirstudies. They are able to carry out con-trolled observations to verify the supposedfunctional relations. During these experi-ments, interfering influences are excluded asfar as possible. In this way an artificial en-vironment-an isolated or closed system-is created, in which the significance of theindividual components can be watched andpossibly even measured. Therefore thestudied objects of these sciences lend them-selves to quantitative description.GENERAL SCIENTIFICMETHOD

The arrangement of observed phenomenainto a system of relations, that is, into a hy-pothesis, postulate, or even a theory made tosuit these observations, is a mental processcalled induction. The functional validityof a working hypothesis is not a priori cer-tain, because often it is initially based onintuition. However, logical deductions fromsuch a hypothesis provide expectations (so-called prognoses) as to the circumstancesunder which certain phenomena will appearin nature. Such a postulate or working hy-pothesis can then be substantiated by addi-tional observations or by experiments espe-cially arranged to test details. The value of

454


4/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESthe hypothesis is strengthened if the ob-served facts fit the expectation within thelimits of permissible error. The author callssuch expectations and additional observa-tions the prognosis-diagnosis method of re-search (1952). Prognosis in science may betermed the prediction of the future findingof corroborative evidence of certain featuresor phenomena (diagnostic facts).This method of scientific research buildsup and extends the relations between thesubject and the object by means of a circuitof inductions and deductions. A short cuton this circuit is the grouping and classifica-tion of the available observations accordingto some preconceived ideas, in order to findempiric rules (fig. 1).

There is, however, no universal recipe forscientific advance. It is a matter of gropingforward into terra incognita of the outer

world by means of methods which should beadapted to the circumstances, such as thevariations in approaches and situations of theresearch workers.

Natural laws and fundamental results ofscientific research are of primary importancefor both the economy and versatility of ourmode of thinking. Large complexes of phe-nomena are thus reduced to more conciselaws of interdependence. However, it is ob-vious that not a single natural law can havean unlimited validity. Extrapolations of thegoverning factors may transgress the limitsof applicability, and there may be deviationsdue to the statistical probability.

SPECIFIC CHARACTEROF GEOLOGYExperiments in geology are far more diffi-cult than in physics and chemistry because

of the greater size of the objects, commonly

Objector

Outer World

Subjector

InnerWorld

FIG. 1.-The circuits of scientific research (according to J. F. Schouten, in Bottema et al., 1960) withsome alterations by the present author.

455


5/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESoutside our laboratories, up to the earthitself, and also because of the fact that thegeologic time scale exceeds the human timescale by a million and more times (Hubbert,1937).This difference in time allows only directobservations of the actual geologic proc-esses, the mind having to imagine whatcould possibly have happened in the past.This mental picture is by sheer necessity avery simplified image of the processes in na-ture. Evidently it is not necessary that theseprocesses happened fully in the same wayand intensity as we imagined. Nor by suchmental experiments can the ancient eventsbe duplicated by laboratory experiments,though the latter certainly have a stimulat-ing effect on our imagination (Kuenen,1958).

Moreover, it should be kept in mind thatthe natural geologic processes are in reality

open systems, susceptible to various ex-ternal influences, in contradistinction to theclosed systems of our physical and chemicalexperiments. The kind of factors, their mag-nitude, and the succession in which theywere active have varied from place to placeand from time to time. Therefore laboratoryexperiments with scale models and a definiteset of factors have only a restricted value ingeology. The latter has to apply other meth-ods of investigation (Haarmann, 1935).The essentially historical character ofgeology is obvious from the need of interpre-tation of still observable traces of eventsthat once happened in or on the earth. Sincegeological thinking tries to mold the pastinto a distinct mental picture, an element ofsubjectivity is introduced (Pannekoek,1956). The disadvantage of incomplete rec-ords on which the interpretation of formerhappenings must be based is as well knownin geology as in the study of human history.The geological archives of stone are incom-plete, and much information has been wipedout by later events.Moreover, it is often difficult, sometimesimpossible, to verify the observations ofother geologists because of the inaccessibili-ty of the area or of many outcrops (e.g., road

cuts, trenches, mine shafts). This puts thegeologic observer at a disadvantage.In collecting the primary geologic data,some personal capacities of the geologist(such as strong physique, perceptive facul-ties, perseverance, talent for drawing) aregenerally of much greater importance thanin any of the sister sciences, which can relyon the quality of the instruments used incollecting primary data.The great importance of the personalityin geology is moreover forcibly required byits being a historical science. As in history,the material in hand remains silent if noquestions are asked. The nature of thesequestions depends on the school to whichthe geologist belongs and on the objectivityof his investigations.

Hans Cloos (1949) called this way of in-terrogation the dialogue with the earth,das Gespraich mit der Erde. It is obviousthat in this conversation the character ofthe subject may easily assume an impor-tance equal to that of the nature of the ob-ject, which is the earth.ROLEOFTHESUBJECTIVENTERROGATOR,

THE GEOLOGISTTwo types of scientists are distinguishedby Wright (1958): (1) The neat and activescientific investigator who strives for classi-fication of his objects and who wants toforce the rigid discipline of certain schemesupon his object of study, and (2) another

type, less neat, less enforcing in schematiz-ing the objects of his study, but more re-ceptive.Half a century ago Oswald (1910) dis-tinguished classicists and romanticistsamong the scientific investigators: the for-mer being inclined to design schemes and touse consistently the deductions from work-ing hypotheses; the latter being more fit forintuitive discoveries of functional relationsbetween phenomena and therefore more ableto open up new fields of study.3 Examples of

3 It may be that many romanticists possessthe so-called harmonic temperaments often foundin blood group A people, while the classicistswould have the rhythmic temperaments of those

456


6/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESboth character types are Werner and Hut-ton (Wegmann, 1958). Werner was a realclassicist. At the end of the eighteenth cen-tury he postulated the theory of neptun-ism, according to which all rocks includinggranites, were deposited in primeval seas.It was an artificial scheme, but, as a classi-fication system, it worked quite satisfactori-ly at the time. Hutton, his contemporaryand opponent, was more a romanticist. Hisconcept of plutonism supposed continu-ally recurrent circuits of matter, which likegigantic paddle wheels raise material fromvarious depths of the earth and carry it offagain. This is a very flexible system whichopens the mind to accept the possible oc-currence in the course of time of a great vari-ety of interrelated plutonic and tectonicprocesses.

According to the views of Comte, statedabout one and one-half centuries ago, thereis a trend, headed by the active and sys-tematic, the classicist type of scientists, toconsider physics and chemistry as the onlytrue natural sciences, for example, the onlysciences in which most relations can be ex-pressed mathematically and in which themagnitude of the variable and constant fac-tors can be measured. Many in this groupmay compare geologists and biologists tobarbaric stone-age scientists, who, more orless hopefully, struggle along to reach theremote but ultimate goal of total quanti-fication and mathematization. By suchclassicists the latter are only accepted out ofcourtesy in the exclusive circle of the exactnatural sciences (Wright, 1958).But many geologists still hesitate to gotoo far in the direction toward robot-geolo-gy ; geology until recently was consideredto be an inexact science and an art (Link,1954, p. 2411).

A different view has been advanced byLeet and Judson, who say in their textbookbelonging o bloodgroupB. This most interestingstatistic correlationbetweencharacterand bloodgrouphas been derived romthe investigationsbyL. Bourdeland J. Genevay,recentlypublished ntheir book Groupessanguins et temperaments Paris,Ed. Maloine,1960).

(1954) that originally geology was essen-tially descriptive, a branch of natural sci-ence. By the middle of the 20th centuryhowever, it had developed into a fullyfledged physical science, making liberal useof chemistry, physics, and mathematics.

Let us look for a synthesis of these appar-ently divergent views. Much of the practiceof geology is a visionary art indeed, since acreative, but scientifically controlled, imagi-nation is required (Goguel, 1951). By meansof creative imagination the geologist has todesign a number of possible reconstructionsof the past events. Some of these have to berejected again if tentative predictions ap-pear to be contradictory to the subsequentlyacquired facts.

But geology is an exact science too. Manyfactors of geological phenomena can bemeasured and grouped in correlationstructures, aspects of which can be treatedmathematically.There are three types of correlation struc-tures (Melton, 1958):a) a type with causal relations in which certain

forces have a subduing effect upon others(cycles of negative feedback);b) a type in which the causal relations havean amplifying effect (cycles with positivefeedbacks);c) a type in which no functional relations be-tween the coincidingphenomena can be dis-cerned.The classicists and the romanticists

among the geologists should co-operative byparticipating in a team of partners to in-vestigate the earth. In this way it will bepossible to reach some synthesis between thetwo afore-mentioned views, namely, geologyis a creative art versus geology is an exactscience.

ROLE OF THE OBJECT OF STUDY,THE EARTH

After considering the subjective aspectsof the geological investigations, we will nowdirect our attention more to the influence ofthe object, the earth, on the procedure ofinvestigation.

457


7/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESPLACE OF GEOLOGY AMONG

THE SISTER SCIENCESThe very nature of the earth determines

the place of geology among the sister sci-ences. As has been pointed out earlier, phys-ics and chemistry are typical basic sciences,which to a certain extent work with abstrac-tions, that is, isolated reactions betweenpure matter inside of closed systems.

During billions of years, however, theearth has been an open system amid acosmic environment. In this environmentmatter reacted upon matter in an infinitenumber of combinations in such a way thatultimately new possibilities and new factorsoriginated, so-called emergent phenome-na. The latter cannot straight away be ex-plained by the natural laws of the basicsciences.An example of such emergent phenomenais the origin of life from non-living chemicalcompounds in the oldest, lifeless oceans ofthe earth. Here, aided by the radiation ener-gy received from the sun, countless chemicalmaterials were synthesized and accumulatedin such a way that they constituted, as itwere, a primeval soup. In this primevalsoup, by infinite variations of lifeless growthand decay of substances during some billionsof years, the way of life was ultimatelyreached, with its metabolism characterizedby selective assimilation and dissimilation asend stations of a sluiced and canalized flowof free chemical energy.If one accepts such emergent phenomenawith their new possibilities, one sees that thenatural sciences tend to possess a certaintype of hierarchy in which the rules and lawsof the simpler stages are also valid for thehigher organized ones, but not vice versa.Physical metabolism of the self-reproducingevolving life, for instance, has certain defi-nite characteristics which make the proc-esses of life differ from test-tube reactions.

Psychological processes which are activein the human body give rise to emergentphenomena with regard to the physiologicalprocesses on which they are based.On the other hand, the emergent prin-ciples of psychology and physiology should

not be applied to geological processes whichare on a lower level in the hierarchy of cos-mic evolution.

It is quite common in geological jargon touse biological, medical, and even psycho-logical terms, and it would definitely be animpoverishment of geological professionalspeech if the usage of these terms were abol-ished. But confusion and misunderstandingare sometimes introduced in this way.By adapting terms from other sciences, aclose watch should be kept on ensuring thatanalogies are not extended beyond scientifi-cally permissible limits. Mother magmaswith a monophyletic descent of igneousrocks, consanguine magma provinces, andthe like, are geological concepts for whichthe emergent principles of biological relation-ship and heredity are not valid. Crystalsand rocks do originate, grow, and disinte-grate. The liberated elements are then againavailable for the growth of other materials.This geochemical complex of phenomena onthe geologic level holds also for living or-ganisms, their growth and their death. Butthe geologic level lacks the emergent prin-ciple of heredity in biology. The complex ofphenomena on the geologic level of evolu-tion does not rise above an extensive net-work of geochemical cycles in countlessforms and dimensions, as was already con-ceived by Hutton.Whereas the geologists have to be carefulof anthropomorphism, the biologists andpsychologists must beware of mechano-morphism ( robotism ). Psychic eventscannot be studied by the techniques used inthe investigation of material objects; there-fore new methods of research have to be de-vised to study its emergent aspects. Never-theless, psychology nowadays has to be ad-mitted to the rank of science (Walker, 1944,p. 75).It appears that there is a kind of cosmicevolution with emergent states of organiza-tion, a cosmic anamorphism (see VanBemmelen, 1948, fig. 1). At the base is thegalactic evolution studied by mathematicalphysics. Then follow in succession, at de-scending levels of energy but at higher and

458


8/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESmore complicated levels of organization: thestellar evolution with its nuclear transmuta-tion energy, the planetary evolution with itsrelease of the chemical energy of the elec-tronic shells, the biotic evolution with itssluiced and canalized flow of free chemicalenergy, and, finally, the psychic energy withits spiritual forces.

What will the future bring? Will it bringstill higher states of organization, or a cos-mic decay-a katamorphism ? To thesequestions mankind can give no answers. Butthe preceding stages of evolution are charac-terized by emergent phenomena, by meansof which the following hierarchy of elementsof science can be set up: physics-chemistry-geology-biology-psychology.

GEOLOGIC METHODS OF RESEARCHPhysics and chemistry provide the natural

laws which also hold in geology. Additionalto those, however, the geologist works withsome general concepts which are the morespecific rules of the game for his scientificinvestigations. These concepts, such as theprinciple of uniformitarianism, are hisguide in the interpretation of the availablefacts. Because of the higher complexity ofthe evolution of the earth, our present basicconcepts need still more footing and devel-opment than those of physics and chemistry.A repeated to and fro between induction anddeduction is necessary.

According to Beloussov (1958), the pro-gressive development of the earth's crustimplies the absence of continents in the farpast and the absence of mobile geosynclinesin the far future. Our earth system of geo-chemical processes is not composed of con-tinuously recurring cycles in which no ves-tige of beginning and no prospect of an endcan be discovered, as was said by Hutton.The geological evolution is a part of the gen-eral cosmic evolution which has an orientat-ed course, according to the second main lawof thermodynamics. Therefore the principleof uniformitarianism generally holds goodfor the not too distant past, in the times thatlife inhabited our planet (that is, for aboutone billion years): but still farther back into

the past the divergence between the then-existing circumstances and the present onesbecomes more and more apparent.Because of the great complexity of the

processes involved in the earth's evolution,the geologist has to apply The Method ofMultiple Working Hypotheses expoundedby the famous American geologist Chamber-lin in 1897.

For example, there are at least two work-ing hypotheses about the origin of theearth: (1) the so-called cold-earth theory,which says that the earth accumulated fromcold cosmic dust and became generally hot-ter by the energy of impact and radioactivi-ty; and (2) the hot-earth theory, which saysthat it was hotter after its original condensa-tion from cosmic gases and that it has sub-sequently been cooling.Also, in the case of the cold-earth theorythe moon probably originated by meteoricclustering in an orbit around the earth, andthe mare as well as the craters on the moonwould be the result of terriffic meteoric im-pacts.

In the case of the hot-earth theory, how-ever, the initial stages of the earth's historywill have been characterized by a fiercearcheo-volcanism at the surface, wherematter balanced at the boundary betweenthe molten and the gaseous state. The tidalpull of the sun may have caused the swell-ing-up of huge blisters along the equator.The moon might have been expelled fromthe side of the earth by the disrupture ofsuch a blister. The latter was then pushedout by explosive evaporation of its base andleft the earth like a huge rocket. Accordingto this hypothesis, at least the maria on themoon are volcanic scars on the side which isfacing the earth. At that time the rocket wasclosed and assumed the form of a sphere byits own gravitational force after havingpassed the limit of Roche at a distance of2.4 earth radii (Van Bemmelen, 1948). Theconsequence expected from this hypothesisis that the side of the moon away from theearth will be smoother and less flooded byarcheo-volcanic maria. The observationsmade by the Russian Lunik seem to confirm

459


9/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESthis prognosis, and this might be in supportof the hot-earth-and-moon-rocket hypothe-sis. Though the cold-earth theory is favoredby most contemporary scientists, this ex-ample shows the necessity of staying open-minded for other hypotheses, each of whichhas to be tested for its implications and ex-pectations. As Hans Cloos said, in the dia-logue with the earth, the latter often appearsto be the more clever one.Another frequently used method out ofthe geologists' repertoire of working hy-potheses is the Method of ComparativeOntology. We pointed out that in the cir-cuit of scientific research, discussed at thebeginning of this paper, a promising char-acteristic common to connected observationsis chosen as a basis of comparison; the evi-dence is then arranged in some series withthat characteristic as a yardstick. We thenlook for relations with series which use otherfactors as a measure and may find signifi-cant correlations. From such correlationstructures causative influences can be for-mulated in a working hypothesis. For in-stance, because of the slow pace of geologicalevolution and the complexity of the struc-tures, we now find at the earth's surface nextto each other types of rocks and of moun-tain-building which belong to differentstages of the evoltionary series. By com-paring their genesis, it is then possible to tellfor an individual mountain range in a cer-tain stage of evolution which circumstancesmight exist in its deeper levels, now inacces-sible to our direct observations. We can alsoattempt to give a more comprehensive pic-ture of its past and to predict to a certainextent its future evolution.In his synthesis of the geology of Indo-nesia the author (1949) applied this methodof comparative ontology in the followingform:

It appears that the parallel structuralbelts, composing the mountain or island-arcsystems in that archipelago, are in differentstages of evolution. They are increasinglyyounger as they are situated closer to theconvex outer side of the system. Each struc-tural belt passed in the course of timethrough consecutive stages of structural and

volcanic evolution, which are now represent-ed in succession by the next parallel belts,each next outer one being in the next young-er stage. The significant correlation betweenthe structural and igneous evolution, ascer-tained by stratigraphical dating of the com-posing formations, is of great importance forthe study of the interaction between tecto-genetic and petrogenetic processes. It en-ables us to visualize the development of acertain belt by studying the geology of theparallel structural zones. In this way theevolution of the Indonesian orogenic sys-tems could be reconstructed, and the rela-tions between plutonic and tectonic proc-esses could be assessed. Table 1 gives therelations between the petrogenetic and theorogenetic evolution of the Indonesianundation systems. In this scheme a correla-tion is given between igneous, topologic, andorogenic stages of their evolution.As the observational base of such seriesis formed by the present-day situation andevents, the comparative ontology has to beguided by the principle of uniformitarian-ism. The interpretation of the functional re-lations between the members of these seriesare retroactive reasonings toward a fixedgoal, namely, the present situation (Bakker,1947). We have to be very careful in choos-ing an interpretation (i.e., the step of induc-tion toward a working hypothesis) becausea choice from an infinite number of possibili-ties has to be made, based on the limitedamount of available knowledge. The work-ing hypothesis we accept is not necessarilycorrect, although it may seem to explainsatisfactorily the observed phenomena.Geologic phenomena and pathologicalsymptoms are similar insofar that both mayhave various causes. It is the art of the diag-nosing physician to recognize the disease; inthe same way the geologist is not allowed tohalt at the apparent. Before a sound inter-pretation is reached, many supplementaryinvestigations and diagnostic observationsshould be done, perhaps each time startingfrom a different premise. This is in essencethe application of the method of the mul-tiple working hypotheses.

The geologist is forced, however, to apply

460


10/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESthe method of comparative ontology as amethod of investigation, for the pace of thegeologic evolution is so much slower thanthe human tempo of living. The geologist isgenerally unable to study the process itself.He can study only the several stages of itsresults by observing and comparing therocks and structures as they are exposedtoday.RELATIONS OF GEOLOGYWITH ITS FAMILY

OF AUXILIARY SCIENCESThe working methods of geology are alsodetermined by its relations to other naturalsciences (fig. 2).

to misuse the subcrustal zones as an asylumfor the effects which are to be expected ac-cording to bold geotectonic hypotheses.

Geochemistry applies the concepts ofchemistry to terrestrial circumstances,studying the distribution and circuits of ele-ments in the course of geologic evolution.The reactions between the electronic shellsof the elements causing chemical bonds arethe leading emergent principle in our plane-tary evolution as compared with the stellarevolution with its nuclear processes at amuch higher energy level (Van Bemmelen,1948, 1952c).

Three more auxiliary sciences of geologyTABLE 1

CORRELATION SCHEME BETWEEN IGNEOUS AND TECTONIC STAGES OF EVOLUTION*STAGES OF EVOLUTION OF THE

OROGENIC ZONES UNDATION SYSTEMPETROGRAPHIC OF AN UNDATION ZONAL STAGES OF Prefa- Embry- Early

PROVINCES SYSTEM OROGENICEVOLUTION tory onic Young Mature MatureAtlantic suite Foreland Prefatory faults XOphiolitic suitePacific suiteMediterranian suite.Plateau basalts

ForedeepGeanticline(s)BackdeepHinterland

Geosynclinal sub-sidenceOrogenic impulse(s)of upliftLate orogenic sub-sidencePostorogenic faults

* From Van Bemmelen, 1950, p. 211.

Formerly, large areas between the severalsciences lay fallow, forming, as it were, ano man's land which could be used, or rathermisused, to dispose of controversial prob-lems. The present scientific net is muchtighter, leaving less freedom for isolated hy-potheses ad hoc. The interpretation of a cer-tain aspect of nature should eventually forma logical part of a harmoniously co-ordinatedscientific world picture.The history of the earth is inseparatelylinked to that of our planetary system, andthe gap between astronomy and geology isbeing filled by cosmogony.Geophysical studies are becoming notonly a welcome but more and more a neces-sary supplement to our geological interpreta-tions of surface surveys. Because of the de-velopment of geophysical tools and the in-creasing wealth of information collected bygeophysics, it becomes less and less possible

are created-paleontology, paleogeography,paleoclimatology-by superimposing thetime factor of the order of magnitude of geo-logic evolution on the phenomena studied bybiology, geography, and meteorology.

Mathematics is indicated as the outerframe of this picture, for it provides the lan-guage of symbols in which the natural eventscan be described quantitatively and exactly.Inside this frame is the family of sciencesauxiliary to geology, the center of the pic-ture being occupied by general and appliedgeology.

This diagram is merely an attempt to il-lustrate the position of geology amid thefamily of natural sciences. Furthermore, ap-plied geology has many relations with tech-nical, sociological, economical, medical,pharmacological, and other sciences; butthese are literally and figuratively on an-

461


11/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTESother level, and they will not be discussedhere.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTOF GEOLOGYThere are three possible methods of ad-vance in the development of geology (Weg-mann, 1958).1. Our current geologic methods and con-cepts may be extended to new areas of ob-

servation. This is a more intensified activityof all branches of geology. To the increasing-ly detailed investigations of the land areas

may be added the geological and geophysi-cal studies of the floor of the oceans and ofthe polar regions and perhaps also of thesurface of the moon.

2. Available geological data may bebrought in keeping with newly acquiredknowledge and concepts in geology as wellas with the advances in other fields of sci-ence. The emergent principle of geochemicalcontrol of tectonic and geotectonic processesmay add to our concepts about the develop-ment of the earth's crust.

FIG. 2.-The relations of geology with its family of auxiliary sciences

462


12/12

GEOLOGICAL NOTES3. Technical improvements of investiga-

tion may open up new fields of observationto the geologist. The new microscopic andultramicroscopic observation techniques,the use of computing machines and otherelectronic devices, and experimental physi-cochemical and mechanical studies shouldbe mentioned in this relation.Applied geology may help to change thefear of atomic energy as a weapon of univer-sal destruction into hope for mankind byapplying it for new strategies to master theneeds of raw materials in our industrial era.In addition to the use of the radioactive ele-ments for charging nuclear power stations,

they might be used in the near future forundergroundexplosionsin orderto increasethe miningproductionand perhapsto reviveapparentlyexhausted oil fields.Consequently, pure and applied geology

look forward to a tremendous field of activi-ty, and it may confidently be expected thatits rather stormy development during thepast century is to continue for many yearsto come.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.-Theauthor wants tothank his colleague C. P. M. Frijlinck for criti-cally reading the manuscript and for his valu-able suggestions.

REFERENCES CITEDBAKKER, J. P., 1947, Naar nieuwe wegen in deanalyse van reliefvormen van het aardoppervlak:Inaugural lecture University of Amsterdam, Feb-ruary 17, 1947.BELOUSSOV,. V., 1958, Some factors governingthe development of the earth's crust: Endeavor,v. 17, p. 173-180.BEMMELEN, R. W. VAN, 1948, Cosmogony andgeochemistry: Internat. Geol. Congress, Proc.18th sess., Great Britain, pt. 2, London, p. 9-21.--- 1949, The geology of Indonesia: The Hague,Sole Agent Mart. Nijhoff.--- 1950, On the origin of igneous rocks inIndonesia: Geologie en Mijnbouw, v. 12, p. 207-220.--- 1952a, Geologie en economie. Inaugural lec-ture. University of Utrecht, February 4, 1952:The Hague, Edit. Nijhoff.---- 1952b, Prognose en diagnose in de geologie:Geologie en Mijnbouw., v. 14, p. 401-409.--- 1952c, The endogenic energy of the earth:Am. Jour. Sci., v. 250, p. 104-117.---- 1954, Mountain building: The Hague, Edit.

Mart. Nijhoff.--- 1955, Tectogenese par gravit6: Soc. gol. debelgique Bull., v. 64, p. 95-123.--- 1956, The geochemical control of tectonicactivity: Geologie en Mijnbouw, v. 18, p. 131-144.--- 1958, Geochemically generated flowcircuitsin the silicate mantle: ibid., v. 20, p. 1-17.--- 1960, New views on east-alpine orogenesis:Internat. Geol. Congress, Proc. 21st sess., Copen-hagen, 1960, pt. 18, p. 99-116.--- 1961, Zur Mechanik der ostalpinen Decken-bildung: Geol. Rundschau, v. 50, p. 474-499.BOTTEMA, ., et al., 1960, De gang der Gedachte.(The way of thought): The Hague, Edit. Mart.Nijhoff, p. 125.CHAMBERLIN,. C., 1897 and 1931, The method

of multiple working hypotheses: Jour. Geologyv. 5, p. 837-848; v. 39, p. 155-165.CLOOs,HANS, 1949, Gesprach mit der Erde: Miin-chen, Edit. Pijper & Co.EDDINGTON,Sir A., 1929, Nature of the physicalworld: Cambridge, England, University Press.GLANGEAUD,L., 1949, Epistimologie des sciencesnaturelles et structure du reel: 15eCong. internat.de philosophie des sciences, Paris, 1949, v. 1,p. 127-139.GOGUEL, J., 1951, La geologie, science naturelleou science physique? Cong. internat. Philos. Soc.VII, Science de la terre, Paris, 1951, p. 7.HAARMANN, E. (ed.), 1935, Um das geologischeWeltbild: Stuttgart, F. Enke, 108 p.HUBBERT, M. KING, 1937, Theory of scale modelsapplied to the study of geologic structures: Geol.Soc. America, Bull. v. 48, p. 1459-1520.KUENEN, PH. H., 1958, Experiments in geology:Geol. Soc. Glasgow Trans., v. 23, 28 p.LEET, L. DON, and JUDSON, SHELDON, 1954, Physi-cal geology: New York, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,466 p.LINK, W. K., 1954, Robot geology: Am. Assoc.Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 38, p. 2411.MELTON,M. A., 1958, Correlation structure ofmorphometric properties of drainage basins andtheir controlling agents: Jour. Geology, v. 66,p. 442-460.OSTWALD, ., 1910, Grosse Manner: Leipzig, Edit.Akad. Verlagsges.PANNEKOEK.. J., 1956, Geologie als wetenschapen als kunst: Inaugural lecture University ofLeiden, February 3, 1956.WALKER,K., 1944, Meaning and Purpose: London,Pelican Book, A211.WEGMAN, E., 1958, Das Erbe Werner's und Hut-ton's: Geologie I, 3/6, p. 531-559.WRIGHT, . W., 1958, Order and disorderin nature:Proc. Geol. Assoc., v. 69, p. 77-82.

463

The Scientific Character Ofgeology

Documents

Transcript of The Scientific Character Ofgeology