88 BOOK REVIEWS

Robert Frodeman (ed),Earth Matters: The Earth Sciences, Philosophy,and the Claims of Community. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 2000. 209 p. Noprice listed.

WHAT DO HUMAN BEINGS HAVE TO DO WITH EARTH?

What is the Earth and what are our connections to it? What are the societalimplications of those connections? And what is the societal role of theEarth sciences? These wonderfully broad questions form the basis for astimulating collection of essays edited by Robert Frodeman. The Earth isboth the backdrop to, and an integral part of, our existence. It providesour physical environment, the raw materials to support our lifestyle, andthe aesthetic environment with which we interact and in which we developour culture. Given the all-pervasive presence of the Earth, it is startlingto read in Carl Mitcham’s essay that “there have been no philosophies ofgeology, much less of Earth.” The essays in this book aim straight for thisgaping void and set the groundwork for what will undoubtedly be a vitaland exhilarating debate.

In selecting the 15 essays for the book, Frodeman, a philosopher trainedin geology, ambitiously aims to cover the spectrum of our relationship withthe Earth, from the scientific to the philosophic, from the pragmatic tothe abstract. The various authors write from their own expertise and thecollection shows, rather than tells, the diversity and interdisciplinarity ofthe topic. There is very obviously no consensus among the authors on whatthe social context of the Earth or the Earth sciences is, or should, or couldbe. There is, however, an excitement in the debate and Frodeman has donea great service to all the disciplines involved by bringing together whatmight initially seem to be an eclectic mix of topics.

We each view the Earth from separate angles – the landscape artist seesshape and form, the geologist sees a history of deep time, the entrepreneursees raw materials and opportunity, the mystic sees the sacred – and all ofthese viewpoints contribute consciously and unconsciously to how societybehaves toward the Earth. One of the strengths of this book is that, in givingequal emphasis to the humanities and the sciences, it shows how valid andimportant each interpretation of Earth is and how each viewpoint can bean important element in our response. One of the challenges is to definethese viewpoints in ways that can be used consciously and knowledgeablyin decision making at all levels.

Readers of this collection will bring to it their own biases andknowledge and, as an economic geologist, I found the essays especiallytimely and illuminating. The science and technology of geology advanced

BOOK REVIEWS 89

spectacularly in the 20th century, but our broad philosophical appreciationof geology has not kept pace with societal and technological changes. Asa consequence, geology is now in a state of double confusion. The scienceis suffering a major identity crisis, to such an extent that it isn’t even sureof its own name – is it geology, or E(e)arth science(s), or geoscience(s),or E(e)arth system science(s), or geological science(s)? Current opinionsseem to be that “geology” refers mainly to deep-time events while “Earthsciences” includes a greater emphasis on present-day Earth processes, butthe issue is by no means resolved. Geology is also suffering a fundamentalcrisis of confidence. Once, geologists proudly went forth, hammer in hand,to map the earth, to decipher its geologic history, and to find resources– they knew what they had to do and the importance of their work tosociety. Now, traditional field mapping is largely considered an archaicskill, resource studies are politically incorrect, and the place of geology insociety is obscure. Present-day geology seriously lacks “the vision thing,”and many traditional sectors of the science have lost a sense of connectionto the community. Some geologists have been struggling to redefine thescience, but this collection of essays – which is the fruit of an innovativeand potentially highly productive movement now emerging from diversegroups of interdisciplinary scholars and practitioners – brings many moreperspectives to the issue. Some of the ideas expressed here will resonatesweetly with many geologists, other ideas will provoke furrowed browsor guffaws of amazement, but they will definitely stimulate much-neededdiscussion and new thinking on the role of the Earth sciences.

Philosophers have studied physics and biology in preference to Earthsciences, but Frodeman points out in his preface that the features that havemade the Earth sciences unattractive for study (incomplete data, lack ofexperimental control and direct observations, vast time spans) may be thevery factors that make the Earth sciences an ideal analog for complexsocietal issues. Geologists have developed techniques for synthesizingand interpreting incomplete data, and they have learned to live with theconsequent uncertainty of their conclusions. Defining geological reasoningand applying it to societal problems is beyond the scope of this book, butit is a tantalizing and intriguing idea.

Frodeman divides the book into three sections. The first deals with thelogic of the Earth sciences and gives a broad sense of how Earth scien-tists approach Earth. The second focuses on the role of the Earth sciencesand Earth-science information in the community and in decision-makingprocesses. The last section is on philosophic approaches to the Earth, andgives a sense of how humanists view the Earth.

90 BOOK REVIEWS

Section one begins with a paper by Victor Baker contrasting theory-directed and Earth-directed science. Theory-directed science is more akinto the traditional physics-based model of scientific reasoning where oneexpects to discover theories, usually based on experiments or mathematics,which will explain Earth. Earth-directed science, in contrast, is based onsemiotics, and expects to understand the world “as is” through interpretingsigns such as field data. While recognizing the need for models, Bakercautions that the Earth may not be reducible solely to mathematics, and thathypothetical reasoning based on real-world observations is a fundamentalcomponent of geological reasoning. Kristin Shrader-Frechette examinesthe use of hydrological models in making decisions on storing nuclearwaste. In a very clearly written essay, she highlights the uncertaintiesof geological data and their consequent models and the fact that hydro-logical models cannot be validated and are rarely testable or falsifiable.She cautions that scientific models alone are not a sufficient basis fordecision making and argues that the public must be involved in makingethical and policy decisions. Bruce Foltz worries that scientific knowl-edge may lead to disenchantment and a loss of wonder in the Earth. Hesuggests, however, that humans need a sense of the world we inhabit, andthat Earth science enhances that “inhabitory interest” and our ethical andcontemplative understanding of the world. Richard Williams, Jr., believesin the fundamental value and objectivity of scientific data. He argues fora conservation ethic based on an understanding of the whole Earth systembased on logic, reason, and scientific research. Christine Turner describesfieldwork as a scientific, cultural, and personal experience. Encounteringnature in situ requires a different set of life and intellectual skills thansitting in a laboratory, and Turner gives a sense of the creativity involved infieldwork. By doing fieldwork, geologists maintain a connection to Earth,the object of their study, and to the places where their data may becomepart of a decision-making process.

The second section considers the interface between geological knowl-edge and human affairs. While the actual study of the Earth may be “pure”science, the results of that study generally have a direct societal context andoften become an element in political and philosophical decision making.Studies of global climate change, for example, highlight the interactionof natural and human systems, but the data do not prescribe what action,if any, should be taken. The scientific information is but one strand in acomplex tangle of political, economic, cultural, and philosophical issuesthat should all feed into the policy-making process. Presenting, analyzing,and contextualizing information to the public demands new skills fromscientists, social scientists, and humanists.

BOOK REVIEWS 91

Reading the essays in this section, one is again struck by the verydifferent interpretations that can be applied to what scientists would see asfacts. A common theme, however, is that scientific data alone, while vitallyimportant, are not enough to resolve complex societal issues or to explainthe Earth to its inhabitants. Brian Polkinghorn takes a pragmatic approachto managing environmental conflicts through a systems-based method. Hehighlights how technical data are the most negotiable elements in a schemethat moves with increasing levels of non-negotiability from data to posi-tions to interests to beliefs to needs and values. Dan Sarewitz, in an essayon the role of science in environmental policy making, points out that thegoals of science (gaining knowledge) are often not the same as the goals ofpolitics (achieving consensus to enable action). He suggests that a “geolo-gical view” of science where “uncertainty is not viewed as a problem to beovercome, but instead as a reality to be embraced,” is the best model forscience in environmental issues. Such science can be used to frame suitablequestions (but not to provide answers) for politicians and policy makers,and it can be used to monitor the results of political decision making.Albert Borgmann makes a plea for adding disclosive explanations to thetraditional scientific explanations of geology. Explaining local geologythrough science or art is the most powerful way of revealing a humanconnection to geology and giving people a sense of the world they inhabit.Borgmann strongly echoes Bruce Foltz’s call for geology to provide aninhabitory context for humankind. Max Oelschlaeger argues that humanshave become “natural aliens” divorced by culture and technology fromthe Earth and, in particular, behaving on a different time scale from naturalcycles. This alienation has made humans the dominant species on Earth butmay also be the cause of ecological disaster. He urges a geophilosophicalconversation between Earth scientists and philosophers to reevaluate therelationships of humans and Earth.

Robert Frodeman seeks to put theory into practice by applying philo-sophical methodology to the question of acid mine drainage in the SanJuan Mountains of Colorado. Philosophers can define and disentangle thecomponents of a debate and contribute a sense of the whole, a sense of howthings fit together, to discussions. They may also give voice to underlyingconcerns of metaphysics, aesthetics, and theology that are often ignored infavor of more familiar and concrete scientific or political issues. Frodemansuggests that we need interdisciplinary “specialists of the general” who candevelop and facilitate debate in public life. The last essay in this sectiondescribes the Nature and Culture program at the University of California,Davis, which integrates science, the humanities, and arts. The authors,Scott McLean, Eldridge Moores, and David Robertson, consider geology

92 BOOK REVIEWS

the ideal science for nonscience students to learn, because it offers a senseof place and a sense of time, it provides an accessible narrative showing theapplication of other sciences, and it has clear connections to human welfareand survival. It is also the inspiration for poetry, such as the writings ofGary Snyder, which further disclose the nature of Earth.

The third section of the book concentrates on philosophic approachesto the Earth and focuses on the human, rather than Earth, side of theEarth-human relationship. These papers raise the question of how toaccommodate emotional and spiritual reactions to Earth in our concept ofEarth science. Carl Mitcham urges a balance between religious, scientific,and philosophical approaches to Earth. By giving more credence to sciencethan to religion or philosophy, humans have been able to manipulate theEarth but they have also become insulated from the Earth itself. Mitchamurges the development of a philosophy of Earth and a reexamination ofthe importance of Earth as a religious concept. Some literal-minded scien-tists may be deterred by the notion of ores as ripening Earthly embryosand miners as contaminated and purified priests, but such a provocativeconfrontation of ideas is one of the achievements of this collection. KarimBenammar contrasts the mystical participation of many so-called primi-tive cultures in the landscape with the lack of a sense of connection tothe natural environment in modern societies. In a similar note to Turner’sessay, he claims that people can best feel a sense of the sacred in awesomenatural settings. In helping to define our understanding of our place onEarth, geologists should credit the sacred as well as practical aspects of theEarth, rocks, and rivers. Alphonso Lingis writes on emotional and visceralreactions, in particular his own reactions, to nature. He contributes a vividsense of the importance of emotion in our relationship to Earth, but is rathertoo willing to assume that the rest of humanity feels as he does. The finalessay in the collection, by Peter Warshall, returns to the matter of Earth– to earth in the form of soil. Soil is the vital interface between peopleand Earth. It is the product of Earth and human processes, it grows ourfood, supports vast ecosystems, cleans our waste, and regulates chemicalprocesses on the planet. The complex interplay of organic and inorganicelements within soil are a metaphor for our relationship with Earth and areminder of the balance that humans must maintain with Earth.

A fundamental tension that emerges from these essays is how muchimportance we should give to humans. Geologists tend to see humans as atiny speck on a vast time scale and take it for granted thatHomo sapienswill become extinct or evolve into something else, and that the Earth willcontinue on without us. What we do to the Earth has immense personalconsequences but, on the grand scale of the universe, may or may not

BOOK REVIEWS 93

matter very much. Humanists focus on a much shorter time scale in whichpeople are the object of study and the implications of our every actionare of importance. Bridging the gap between those who, like RichardWilliams, feel that there is “nothing special about humans other than theuniqueness of their complex brains and high intelligence with respect toall other life-forms on the planet,” and those who feel that almost everyhuman emotion is worthy of analysis, is one of the challenges facing thosewho want to integrate the Earth sciences and humanities.

Another striking aspect in many of the essays is the romantic view ofprimitive societies and their connection to and reverence for nature. Ifwe do not have to sacrifice modern conveniences, it is easy to extol thewonders of primitive living, but the great impetus in society has been tofind ways of escaping from the vagaries of nature. Our very success inusing raw materials allows us the luxury of admiring what we do not haveto endure, and therein lies a major point of contention. Being intimate withthe Earth may be a fine thing but at what cost, and to whom?

There is something in this collection of essays to provoke, irritate, andexcite almost any reader. Frodeman and the other authors have writtenchallenging but not esoteric essays, and the book would be an excellenttext for graduate or senior undergraduate classes in the Earth and environ-mental sciences and in the humanities. Because the collection crossesso many disciplines, experts in almost any field will encounter new andperhaps startling perspectives on the role of the Earth and the Earthsciences in our society. The time is ripe for a debate on how we see andrelate to the Earth. This book is an important and stimulating contributionto that debate.

Department of Geology and MAEVE BOLAND

Geological EngineeringColorado School of MinesGolden, CO 80401E-mail: mboland@mines.edu

Darrell Addison Posey (ed),Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity.Intermediate Technology Publications and Nairobi: United NationsEnvironment Programme, London 1999. 731 + xx pp.

This is an impressive, if daunting book. At seven hundred-plus double-column pages, boasting contributions from some one hundred fifty authors(from Baird Callicott, Mark Sagoff, Vandana Shiva, Timothy Weiskel,