‘real’ geomorphology revisited

Abstract

Abstract Some of the reasons are given for the editorial (Richards, 1990) now discussed by Rhoads (1994) and Bassett (1994). These include the lack of interest generally displayed by geomorphologists in matters of scientific philosophy and method, and the instrumentalist view of research often presented to postgraduate students given present funding imperatives. It is suggested that in a revision of views about the validity of a hypothesis‐testing, critical rationalist methodology might have considerable implications for the practice of environmental sciences, and that accordingly the debate initiated by Rhoads and Bassett is worthy of continuation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.