Institute for Christian Teaching
Education Department of Seventh-day
Adventists
A
CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW OF THE GEOGRAPHER'S WORLD
By
Harwood Lockton
Department of Humanities
Avondale College
Cooranbong, H.S.W., Australia
Prepared for the
Faith and Learning Seminar
Held at
Avondale College
Cooranbong, N.S.W., Australia
Junary 1990
070-90 Institute for Christian Teaching
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring Md 20904, USA
INTRODUCTION
Geography is an ancient interest but a relatively
new discipline. Its roots go back at least to Herodotus (485-425 BC) but it
only became a formal academic discipline in the nineteenth century. Throughout
its long history, geography has had as its focus the observable fact that
people and landscapes vary from place to place across the Earth's surface. A
basic definition of geography is the study of places and their people-where
these places are, what they are like, how these places affect the people, how
he people affect these places, and what human activities go on in and between
these places.
At a more abstract level, geography is
the study of societies and space- how space affects the organization of
societies, and how in turn societies organize their spaces and indeed 'create'
space. Geography is simultaneously socially constitutive and socially
constituted.
The purpose of this paper is to provide a
Christian perspective on the nature of geography and is primarily intended for
fellow geographers at both the secondary and tertiary levels. However as
geography is only offered in a few Seventh-day Adventist Colleges, it is hoped
that this paper will be accessible to non-specialists especially in the social
sciences. From this examination it will
be shown that the secular paradigms offer a limited view of geographic reality
and that a Christian perspective brings an added and necessary dimension.
THE
NATURE OF GEOGRAPHY
The contemporary nature of geography can
be likened to a tapestry: a number of approaches or threads have been formative
as the discipline has developed over the past 2000 years. Since 1950 there has
been a rapid succession of approaches which some geographers have endeavoured
to fit into Kuhn's model of revolutionary paradigmatic change (Johnston 1983).
However, though at any one time there may be a dominant paradigm, there has not
been paradigm succession. Rather elements of the older paradigms co-exist, if
uncomfortably, with the newer ones. The threads are continuous. Five major
approaches will be briefly reviewed, in their chronological sequence.
1.
Regional
In the nineteenth and first half of the
twentieth centuries, regional geography held sway. Essentially it was a
description or inventory of the varied environments on earth and the people who
occupied these environments. The implicit philosophy was empiricism that
is that all knowledge is based on experience: the things others or we
experience are the only things that exist. The methodology employed was that of
data collection, from both observation in the field and secondary sources, and
the dissemination of the 'facts'. The observers were deemed to be objective and
value-free though many in practiced collected data that suited their sponsors,
for example commercial information from the new colonies for the imperial
governments (Johnston 1989:50).
This approach, especially at school
level, often degenerated into a 'capes and bays' approach – a sort of global
trivial pursuit. The National
Geographic's National Geography Bee in the USA and the Geographical Association's
Worldwide Quiz in the UK are really throwbacks to this empiricist capes and
bays approach.
Basically the regional approach answered
the questions, 'Where is it?' and 'What is it like, there?' But the questions
'Why is it like that, there?' or 'Why is it there?' are more tantalizing. Some regional geographers attempted to place
the observed facts into an explanatory framework to answer these higher order
questions and adopted Darwin's ideas about natural selection and the adaptation
by organisms to their environment. (1)
In environmental determinism,
these ideas were extended into the social arena whereby it was thought that the
nature of societies was determined in a unidirectional manner by the physical
environment of a given locality. For
example, it was suggested that the great Middle Eastern religions of Judaism,
Christianity and Islam originated in this largely desert region because there
was nothing in the landscape to occupy the mind and consequently meditation was
the only possible mental activity! Environmental determinism ignored the
reality that human-environment relations are two ways – each affects but rarely
'determines' the other.
Boundaries were assigned to the regions,
often with difficulty, so as to enclose areas that had some essential unifying
characteristic in common: usually a physical feature and commonly a river
drainage basin. This illustrates the
tacit acceptance of environmental control over people (Johnston 1989) even by
regional geographers who did not subscribe to environmental determinism.
Unfortunately, the concept of
environmental determinism persists in some primary school texts. A variant, social Darwinism, which sees
western societies as the epitome of progress and hence superior to so-called 'lesser
developed' societies is implicit in some Adventist mission report literature
("stone-age peoples"; "they do not even have computers")
even though the discipline of geography had largely discarded this concept by
the 1930s.
2.
Spatial
Analysis
Regional geography had lost its dominance
by the 1950s. Geographers were keen to
use more rigorous, scientific explanation after the debacle of environmental
determinism to answer the question 'Why there?’ This was particularly so in human geography: physical geography
for some time had used a more scientific approach and numerical data. The new approach in human geography was
spatial analysis, which is based on positivism (itself a development of empiricism). Because this approach relies on statistical
methods it is often referred to as the quantitative approach but the use of
statistics is only a means to an end in following the scientific method.
The fundamental assumption of the spatial analytic approach is that the methods of the physical sciences can be equally applied to the social sciences (Johnston 1986). The physical sciences – at least pre-Einstein and pre-Chaos theory – are predicated on the notion of order and consequently predictions can be made. Further, the observer is deemed to be value-free and the only valid knowledge we have is that derived from sensory experience, provided this experience can be verified by others. The aim is to generate law-like statements (or theory) by a process of model building, hypothesizing, and hypothesis testing " in a continuous looping procedure of organized speculation" (Johnston 1989: 51).
Deriving from the assumption that social
phenomena can be studied in essentially the same way as physical phenomena, is
the concept that the features of the human landscape – location of cities,
transport networks, land-use patterns etc – are organized according to
recognizable, repeated and ordered patterns.
Because the humanly created world is exceedingly complex, reality is
simplified in the spatial analytical approach, the key simplification being the
use of the 'economic man' (sic) concept imported from neo-classical
economics. Human beings are considered
to have complete knowledge of a given situation, to be driven by profit
maximizing motivations and make perfectly rational (i.e. economic)
decisions. The various spatial
analytical models rely on economic determinism: human agents have to respond to spatial
structures. People are no more than
machines operating in an economic environment.
Even from a non-Christian viewpoint this is untenable and the spatial
analytical approach was never accepted by all geographers even in its heyday of
the 1960s.
Another
important simplifying assumption is that of an isotropic plain – the real and
variegated landscape is reduced to a featureless, uniform plain. Thus places become part of abstract space
and the real world of variety disappears and may be the inherent interest of
geography to school students is lost. An exemplar of this approach is Haggett's
(1965) Locational Analysis in Human Geography.
3.
Humanistic
Various humanistic approaches have
been offered as a critique of positivism and its arid conception of space. Space is abstract but place is something
experienced. The humanistic approach
asks 'What does this place/landscape mean to those who live in it?'
Humanistic approaches attempt to promote understanding rather than explanation. In geography this means trying to understand the human world by studying people's relationships with nature and their spatial behavior, in terms of their feelings and ideas about place. The scientific method is rejected because; human geography at least, deals with the 'world of meaning' and not the 'world of things'. The role of the individual in creating their own ‘geography’ is central and so humanistic approaches focus on the actors. As Johnston says, "Humanistic geography does not describe a place from the outside but portrays what it is like to be part of that place" (1989: 56).
Because these approaches eschew formal
research and codification, it is difficult to analyze their philosophical bases
but idealism (all reality is a mental construction, an idea), phenomenology
(intuition is the only valid source of knowledge), and existentialism (reality
is created by free human agents) have all been used by various humanistic
geographers (Holt-Jensen 1988: 78-81, 107-111). Yi-Fu Tuan's Landscapes of Fear (1980) is an exemplar of
the humanistic approach. At the school
level these approaches are popular as they coincide with the ideals of
child-centered education.
4.
Radical
This approach, also known as the
political economy approach, has been used widely in the 1980s in analyses of
industrial location, global inequalities and urban problems. It is currently the dominant paradigm in
human geography and calls for revolutionary theory in tandem with revolutionary
praxis. The goal is a social revolution
to replace the apparently oppressive structures of capitalist society with a
socially just society. The central
questions are 'who benefits/loses because of this location decision?' and 'How
can this place be changed so that all benefit?' Storper and Walker's The
Capitalist Imperative (1988) is an exemplar of this approach.
The dominant form of radical geography is
Marxist, particularly structural Marxism.
Underlying this approach is a Materialist analysis of society:
for humans to live, the production of objects necessary for physical needs is
essential. The material or economic
dimension (the base) of society is paramount and the other dimensions such as religion,
education, politics (all part of the superstructure) are merely determined by
the base though they exist to support and legitimize the capitalist mode of
production.
Marx proposed five modes of production of
which capitalism is the fourth in his evolutionary sequence. The essence, according to Marx, of the
capitalist mode of production is the antagonistic yet mutually necessary
relations between two classes, the capitalists (or owners of the means of
production) and the workers. This antagonism generates conflict and ultimately
revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist class. However capitalists also
compete with each other in a 'survival of the fittest' manner.
Structural Marxism is quasi-determinist:
human agents are little more than puppets manipulated by the economic base
(Holt-Jensen 1988:114). This approach
conflicts with the humanistic approach, which maintains that individuals are
free to act and that there are no constraining external circumstance to limit
their actions. According to Marx, the
capitalist exploits his/her workers because of the imperatives of his/her class
position and so as an individual is not to blame. Social structures are deemed to be more significant than human
agency: determinism seems to haunt geographic explanation.
Paradoxically in view of Marx's own moral
indignation at the plight of factory workers in nineteenth century England,
there is no basis for morality in his schema.
Religion, a part of the superstructure, is a creation of the capitalist
class to divert the proletariat from the real issues of their oppressed
condition.
5.
Postmodernism
Postmodernism is a currently emerging
approach or collection of approaches (see Soja 1989). Essentially postmodernism is a critique of the
Enlightenment. It can not accept the
authority of any one paradigm or approach to be the answer: there can be no
Grand Theory (Dear 1988). In geography
it is a movement beyond the modern (such as spatial analysis and radical
geography) and "an invitation to construct our own human
geographies" (Gregory 1989:69).
There is as yet no clear epistemology, in part because the approach
appears to be combinational and eclectic involving geography, history,
sociology and the critical school, especially Habermas. Peet and Thrift (1989:23) suggest that this
approach assumes:
". . . that meaning is produced in language . . . that meaning is not fixed but is constantly on the move . . . and that subjectivity does not imply a conscious, unified, and rational human subject but instead a kaleidoscope of different discursive practices. In turn the kind of method needed to get at these conceptions will need to be very supple, able to capture a multiplicity of different meanings without reducing them to the simplicity of a single structure."
A
fascinating exemplar of a postmodernist approach is Soja's interpretation of
contemporary Los Angeles (1989: chapter 9).
6. Key Questions in Geography
These differing paradigms have
contributed richness to the discipline of geography. The central focus is still the study of the Earth's surface as
the space in which people live in specific places and environments. The key questions, which summarise
geographic inquiry, are:
1.
Where are
people and their activities distributed on the Earth's surface?
2.
What are
the places and environments like where these people and their activities are
located?
3.
What is the
nature of the relationships between people and their environments?
4.
How do the
people perceive their environments?
5.
Why are
these people and their activities located in these places?
6.
Who decides
and who benefits or loses from the location decisions that have been made?
A
CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW
According to Walsh and Middleton
(1984:35) a worldview should answer four fundamental questions:
1.
Who am I?
2.
Where am I?
3.
What is
wrong?
4.
What is the
remedy?
A biblical worldview is sketched here
that answers these questions and will be used to test the current philosophies
and paradigms in geography. (2) The organising theme for this biblical
worldview is the major events in salvation history.
1.
The Great
Controversy
This acknowledges the existence of God,
the central fact of the Christian worldview.
Further, it identifies the source and origin of Satan and evil and hence
sin in humanity. The Great Controversy
is a conflict between God and Satan, between good and evil. As C. S. Lewis points out so aptly: "There is no neutral ground in the
universe: every square inch, every split second, is claimed by God and
counterclaimed by Satan" (quoted in Walsh and Middleton 1984:71). This conflict began before the Creation of
this world and will continue until the Eschaton., A Christian worldview thus has eternal and supernatural
dimensions.
2.
Creation
The act of Creation clearly identifies
God as the creator of our world and the universe. This world is part of God's
kingdom and He is Lord and Sovereign. Christians should thus have a high view
of their fellow humans as all were created in the image of God and hence are
equal before God. The natural world is
also God's creation; we are called to be environmental stewards (see Lockton,
forthcoming). As God's representatives we are mandated to reveal His love,
mercy, justice and holiness, or in other words, His image.
3.
Fall
Though created perfect, this world,
including both the natural and social orders, has been contaminated and warped
by evil. The locus of the Great
Controversy was switched from heaven to earth at the Fall. This changed the nature of human nature and
resulted in a series of broken relationships: humans with God, humans within
themselves, humans with other humans, humans with their environment. Every aspect of human society and of nature
has been changed and sin is not only personal and individual it is also
corporate and infects social structures.
The Fall also shows that human beings were created with the capacity to
make moral choices.
4.
Redemption
Christ's salvation offered at the cross
can begin to restore the relationships broken at the Fall. However that restoration depends upon human acceptance
of Christ's offer and it will never be full and complete this side of the
Eschaton. The role of the Holy Spirit is central in this restorative process.
5. The Eschaton
Earth history is linear and will
culminate in the second advent of Christ.
Only at this event will the relationships broken at the Fall be fully
restored as the Great Controversy is ended, Satan defeated and sin
eradicated. After the second advert
there will be a new creation, a new perfect order.
While the Creation and Redemption give us
cause for optimism about human affairs, the Great Controversy and the Fall
provide a realism that is missing in many of the Christian transformist visions
for the world (see Walsh and Middleton 1984).
We cannot achieve complete transformation (whether Calvinist or Marxist)
of this world this side of the Eschaton.
A
CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE ON CONTEMPORARY GEOGRAPHY
As the regional approach has almost
disappeared and the emergent postmodernist approach is not yet clearly
delineated, the three contemporary approaches of spatial analysis (positivist),
humanistic and radical (structural/Marxist) will be examined from a Christian
perspective. Johnston (1989:62) has
referred to these approaches as part of the empirical, hermeneutic and critical
sciences respectively.
Use is made of a preliminary analysis
produced by the newly formed Christian Geographers' Fellowship (Figure 1),
which is structured around the presuppositional hierarchy of Harrison and
Livingstone (1980). This moves from the
highest level, Cosmology through the successively lower levels of Ontology,
Epistemology and Methodology.
From a Christian critique the three
approaches have much in common. At the
cosmological level there is no God and the origins of the world are therefore
seen as accidental and not purposeful.
In empiricism and positivism there is no room for God as nothing is a priori (Holt-Jensen 1988:92). Human nature likewise is seen as accidental
in origin and so without any existential purpose. For the Christian this is a partial view that denies human beings
their full God-given humanity. Human
beings were created in the image of God and have both potential and
choice. Again we see that the secular
paradigms do not have a complete view of people.
At the ontological level the secular
paradigms place humans in a primary position, people are the ultimate source of
knowledge, whereas the Christian viewpoint places humans in a secondary
position as God is above His created beings.
"You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings" (Psalm
8:5, NIV). Consequently for Christians
there are sources of ultimate knowledge beyond themselves, namely God's
revelation to us in Christ and the Word.
At the epistemological level "man is
the measure of all things". The
eternal and moral dimensions are ignored in these secular paradigms.
At the methodological level there is
probably no difference between the selection of appropriate techniques by
either the secular or Christian perspectives.
The difference is in the conclusions drawn from the analysis, whether
human explanations are seen as primary or secondary.
Further criticisms can be made of the
individual non-Christian approaches.
Spatial analysis elevates the economic to center position in exactly the
same way as does Marxism. Human nature
is diminished in the spatial analytical view as human agents can only act
passively under a deterministic structure.
Humans are only machines, part of a mechanistic system where morality
and ethics have no place and so the "best" or optimum location (the
central concern of most of the models in this approach) is seen solely in terms
of profitability and not in terms of, for example, environmental or social
impacts.
The humanistic approaches criticize the
positivistic approach for many of the same reasons as does the Christian
perspective (see Ley 1980) but they swing the pendulum too far in the human
agency direction so that individuals, and not God are central. Each person is totally free as regards his
or her nature and destiny (Sire 1988:111) and so there is no absolute ethical
framework within which humans should act.
The Marxist approaches must be critiqued
at the fundamental level of being materialist.
Human life is more than the material.
"Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes
from the mouth of God" (Matthew 4:4,NIV).
As with the spatial analytical approach the Marxist approach is
deterministic and has a low view of human nature. (3) Consequently human agency
is very limited, being constrained by the imperatives of the mode of production
and the structures of society. Societal
and individual change are essential components of both Marxism and Christianity
but in the former the structures of society must be changed in order to produce
the 'new man', whereas according to Christianity conversion change of the
individual is a prerequisite for societal change and improvement. Evidence from the communist countries
suggests that the Marxist 'new man' is elusive. However, this line of reasoning can be turned back on Christians
and 'Christian nations.’ A further
Christian criticism is that Marxist solutions accept immoral means to achieve
their desired ends because there is no basis for morality.
The Marxist approach is valuable in that
it has directed geographers to aspects of society and space that were
previously ignored – it identifies what is wrong although it does not get to
the root cause of the wrong. Ley (1974)
has provided a penetrating Christian critique of the Marxist perspective in
regard to the explanation of inequality in the city. (4) As he concludes
"...it is privatistic iniquity, not social inequity, which is the root
cause of evil in the city" (page 71).
It needs a Christian perspective to extend the analysis and arrive at
ultimate causes in terms of the Fall and the existence of evil. Only then can viable solutions be
formulated.
Each of the approaches in the discipline
of geography has its strengths and usefulness.
But each approach is seen by its practitioners in exclusive terms and
reality can not be encompassed by any one of these approaches, especially when
that reality includes the supernatural dimension as outlined in the Christian
worldview. Figure 2 attempts to summarise some of the key features of these
approaches. Christians are generally
comfortable with the empirical sciences but should be able to utilize both the
hermeneutical sciences in order to better understand people and the critical
sciences to critique the way in which society actually operates (the prophetic
role?). However we should not see these
approaches "as decisive, or as the only relevant analyses" (Gill
1989:66).
THE
VALUE OF GEOGRAPHY IN CHRISTIAN EDUCATION
Geography should be an integral part of
education in Christian schools for a number of compelling reasons. In terms of content, the discipline aids the
student in understanding the local environment in which he/she lives. It locates that local environment in the
wider global system in which all places, and people, are interdependent.
But it is in terms of values that
geography has a crucial role in Christian education. Geography in Christian schools has a trinity of interests: God,
the planet and people. Two core value areas
derive from these interests (Lockton 1990).
First, concern for the state of the environment, whether local, national
or global. It is paradoxical that
Seventh-day Adventists with their concern for the veracity of the creation
account have not been as concerned with the stewardship of that creation
(Lockton, forthcoming). Geography has a
long tradition of such concern. A
Christian understanding of environmental issues is particularly needed at the
present time as the 'green' movement has a distinctly pantheistic tone. Perhaps this is the time to call humanity to
"Fear God and give Him glory . . .worship Him who made the . . . the earth" (Revelation 14:7,
NIV).
Second, concern for the plight and
condition of people in other places.
Christ gave us the Great Commandment – to love others – and geography
can help in creating empathy and compassion for the human condition, especially
in distant places. Christ also gave us
the Great Commission – to go into the entire world. Again it is paradoxical
that Seventh-day Adventists with the most global of Protestant mission programs
have largely ignored geography (5).
Yet Ellen White (1903:269) called for an education that studied
"all lands in the light of missionary effort" that students might
"become acquainted with the peoples and their needs".
Contemporary geography and Christianity
are showing a convergence of interest and concern – for the state of the
environment and the persistent and mammoth problem of global inequality. Geography should be prominent in all
Christian schools.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper has outlined the philosophical
presuppositions of various approaches in the discipline of geography. Several of these presuppositions conflict
with those of a Christian worldview.
However this is not unique to geography and in fact offers the Christian
teacher an excellent opportunity to help his/her students better understand
conflicting worldviews and to see how their Christian faith relates to their
academic pursuits.
I also contend that the Christian
critique enhances and enlarges the otherwise restricted, partial viewpoints of
the secular approaches. Reality is
larger and more complex than they admit.
END NOTES
1.
Darwin's
influence upon the discipline of geography has been traced by Stoddart (1966)
and Livingston (1985).
2.
The
difference between Christian and Adventist viewpoints has not been defined in
this paper, though the Great Controversy motif is chiefly an Adventist
concept. The Eschaton, especially its
imminence, while not unique to Adventists is not held by all Christians.
3.
Marxism and
positivism developed from empiricism and all three are part of the broad
category of naturalism (see Sire 1988).
4.
Other
Christian critiques in geography have been offered by Houston (1978) on
relationships between people and land/territory and by Wallace (1978) on the
presuppositions of economic geography.
5.
History has
always been stronger than geography in the SDA educational system, presumably
because of the latter's relationship to prophecy.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Christian
Geographers' Fellowship Report,
March 1989 (c/- Matthew Sleeman, St. Catherine's
College, Cambridge CB2 1RL, UK).
Dear, M. 1988 The postmodern challenge:
reconstructing human geography. Transactions
of the Institute of British Geographers, 13:262-74.
Gill, D.W. 1989 The
Opening of the Christian Mind, IVP, Downers Grove, Illinios.
Gregory, D. 1989 Areal Differentiation
and Post-Modern Geography in Gregory, D. & Walford, D. (eds) Horizons in
Human Geography, Macmillan, Basingstoke, U.K.:67-96.
Haggett, P. 1965
Locational analysis in Human Geography, Arnold, London.
Harrison, R.T & Livingstone, D.N.
1980 Philosophy and problems in human geography: a presuppositional approach, Area,
12: 25-31
Holt-Jensen, A.
1988 Geography: History and Concepts, Paul Chapman Publishing, London.
Houston, J.M. 1978 The concepts of 'place'
and 'land; in the Judaeo-Christian tradition, in Ley & Samuels (eds),
Humanistic Geography: Prospects and Problems, Croom Helm, London: 224-237.
Johnston, R.J. 1983 Geography and
Geographers: Anglo-American Human Geography since 1945, Ed Arnold, London.
Johnston, R.J.
1986 Philosophy and Geography, Ed Arnold, London.
Johnston, R.J. 1989 Philosophy, Ideology
and Geography, in Gregory, D & Walford, R (eds) Horizons in Human
Geography, MacMillan, Basingstoke, U.K.: 48-66
Ley, D. 1974 The city and good and evil:
reflections on Christian and Marxist interpretations, Antipode, 6:66-74.
Ley, D. 1980 Geography Without
Man: a Humanistic Critique,
Geography department Research Paper #24, University of Oxford.
Livingstone, D. 1985 Evolution, science
and society: historical reflections on the geographical experiment,
Geoforum, 16: 119-130.
Lockton, H.A.
Forthcoming. Creation: the neglected
doctrine? Ministry
Lockkton, H.A. 1990 Geography's impact on
human values, Journal of Adventist education, Feb-Mar: 10-13,44-45.
Peet, R. & Thrift, N. 1989 Political
economy and human geography in Peet, R & Thrift, N. (eds) New Models in
Geography, Unwin & Hyman, London, Vol 1:3-29.
Sire, J.W. 1988 The Universe Next
door: A Basic World View Catalogue, IVP, Downers Grove, Illinois.
Soja, E.W. 1989 Postmodern
Geographies, Verso, London.
Stoddart, D.R.
1966 Darwin's impact on Geography, Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogrs., 56:683-698.
Storper, M.
& Walker, R. 1988 The Capitalist Imperative, Blackwell, Oxford.
Tuan Yi-Fu 1980 Landscapes
of Fear, Blackwell, Oxford.
Wallace, I. 1978 Toward a humanized
conception of economic geography, in Ley & Samuels (eds) Humanistic
Geography: Prospects and Problems, Croom Helm, London: 91-108.
Walsh, B.J.
& Middleton, J.R. 1984 The Transforming Vision, IVP, Downers Grove,
Illinois.
White, E.G. 1903
Education, Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mountain View,
California.
HERMENEUTIC SCIENCES HUMANISTIC Individual: feelings Anarchy
EMPIRICAL SCIENCES
POSITIVISM Nature: things
Preservation of status quo CRITICAL SCIENCES RADICAL Society: classes
Revolutionary change
KEY TO
DIAGRAM
GENERAL
CATEGORY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE
SPECIFIC
APPROACH IN GEOGRAPHY
Focus of
study
Political
Orientation
FIGURE 2 RELATIONOSHIPS BETWEEN CRHISTIAN
AND SECULAR
PHILOSOPHIES IN GEOGRAPHY AND THE SOCIAL
SCIENCES