Theoretical geography: some speculations

The argument of the paper is presented in three parts. First, some preliminary semantic issues are dealt with. These include definitions of basic concepts, and discussions of systems of interest to geographers, the role of associated disciplines and the theoretical development of a discipline. Secondly, a historical review is presented of the development of theoretical geography. Thirdly, there are some speculations on the future of theoretical geography, with particular reference to research and teaching. THE theoretical development of a discipline is an important component of the development of the discipline as a whole, even though it often actively involves only a few of the practitioners. I believe this to be true of geography and hence that the subject of theoretical geography is worth discussion. I also strongly suspect that the time is particularly ripe for such a discussion. Geography has had its so-called quantitative revolution and I believe that there is often a confusion between 'quantitative' and 'theoretical'. I should like to try to resolve the confusion and to indicate that theoretical development is much more important than quantification. Also, I suspect there is a mystique associated with the theoretical branch of any discipline, and perhaps especially associated with theoretical geography, and I should like to try to dispel this mystique. I believe that my argument leads to several important conclusions about research and teaching in geography at all levels, and I shall try to summarize these at the end of my lecture. The argument is divided into three parts. First, I shall tackle some preliminary issues of semantics. Secondly, I shall review briefly the historical development of theoretical geography, using examples from urban geography and from geomorphology as illustrations. Thirdly, I shall speculate about the future of theoretical geography. PRELIMINARIES: CONCEPTS, DISCIPLINES AND THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT