Abstract
This commentary reflects uncertainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis within the context of Simone Tulumello’s essay (in this issue). Epistemologically, positivism, logical empiricism and behaviourism must be understood as historical stages in the evolution of quantitative human geography, even though the analytical legacy is clear. A more recognisable quantitative methodological framework, related to post-millennial human geographic studies, seeks sufficient evidence, which supports or refutes a particular line of thought. In general, the consideration of uncertainty and error is deeply tied to the methodological knowledge in quantitative analysis. Regardless of methodology or discipline, however, the risks of reporting over-certainty or clear misconduct are essential ethical questions. Uncertainty is linked also to the limits of conceptualisation and information catchment, but robust information revealing otherwise-hidden patterns is often highly valuable.
Highlights
This commentary reflects uncertainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis within the context of Simone Tulumello’s essay
I dare to state that positivism, logical empiricism, and behaviourism should be understood as historical strata buried deep under the actual foundations of present human geographic quantitative spatial analysis, instead of understanding them as vigorous paradigms in this field (Sheppard 2001)
As the heritage of the quantitative revolution, substantial selection of useful analyses still has a significant role in building information, knowledge and society in the postmodern era
Summary
This commentary reflects uncertainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis within the context of Simone Tulumello’s essay (in this issue). Tulumello’s (2019) essay opens with an intriguing and playfully provoking debate concerning certainty, uncertainty and maybe something that could be defined as ‘pseudo certainty’ in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis. I dare to state that positivism, logical empiricism, and behaviourism should be understood as historical strata buried deep under the actual foundations of present human geographic quantitative spatial analysis, instead of understanding them as vigorous paradigms in this field (Sheppard 2001).
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have