Uniformitarianism

File:Hutton Unconformity , Jedburgh.jpg

Hutton's Unconformity at Jedburgh.
Above: John Clerk of Eldin's 1787 illustration.
Below: 2003 photograph.

Uniformitarianism, also known as the Doctrine of Uniformity or the Uniformitarian Principle,<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> is the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in our present-day scientific observations have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref><ref name=gould1965>Template:Harvnb, "The assumption of spatial and temporal invariance of natural laws is by no means unique to geology since it amounts to a warrant for inductive inference which, as Bacon showed nearly four hundred years ago, is the basic mode of reasoning in empirical science. Without assuming this spatial and temporal invariance, we have no basis for extrapolating from the known to the unknown and, therefore, no way of reaching general conclusions from a finite number of observations."</ref> It refers to invariance in the metaphysical principles underpinning science, such as the constancy of cause and effect throughout space-time,<ref>Template:Harvnb; "The uniformitarian principle assumes that the behavior of nature is regular and indicative of an objective causal structure in which presently operative causes may be projected into the past to explain the historical development of the physical world and projected into the future for the purposes of prediction and control. In short, it involves the process of inferring past causes from presently observable effects under the assumption that the fundamental causal regularities of the world have not changed over time."</ref> but has also been used to describe spatiotemporal invariance of physical laws.<ref>Strahler, A.N. 1987. Science and Earth History- The Evolution/Creation Controversy, Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, USA. p. 194: “Under the updated statement of a useful principle of uniformitarianism it boils down essentially to affirmation of the validity of universal scientific laws through time and space, coupled with a rejection of supernatural causes.” p. 62: “In cosmology, the study of the structure and evolution of the universe, it is assumed that the laws of physics are similar throughout the entire universe.”</ref> Though an unprovable postulate that cannot be verified using the scientific method,<ref>Rosenberg, Alex. Philosophy of science: A contemporary introduction, 4th ed. Routledge, 2019, 173</ref> some consider that uniformitarianism should be a required first principle in scientific research.<ref name=simpson1963>Template:Harvnb, "Uniformity is an unprovable postulate justified, or indeed required, on two grounds. First, nothing in our incomplete but extensive knowledge of history disagrees with it. Second, only with this postulate is a rational interpretation of history possible, and we are justified in seeking—as scientists we must seek—such a rational interpretation."</ref>

In geology, uniformitarianism has included the gradualistic concept that "the present is the key to the past" and that geological events occur at the same rate now as they have always done, though many modern geologists no longer hold to a strict gradualism.<ref>FARIA, Felipe. Actualismo,Catastrofismo y Uniformitarismo. In: Pérez, María Luisa Bacarlett & Caponi, Gustavo. Pensar la vida: Filosofía, naturaleza y evolución. Toluca: Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, p. 55–80, 2015.[1]</ref> Coined by William Whewell, uniformitarianism was originally proposed in contrast to catastrophism<ref>Template:Harvnb, "the idea that Earth was shaped by a series of sudden, short-lived, violent events."</ref> by British naturalists in the late 18th century, starting with the work of the geologist James Hutton in his many books including Theory of the Earth.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Hutton's work was later refined by scientist John Playfair and popularised by geologist Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology in 1830.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> Today, Earth's history is considered to have been a slow, gradual process, punctuated by occasional natural catastrophic events.

History

18th century

File:Siccar point SE cliff.jpg

Cliff at the east of Siccar Point in Berwickshire, showing the gently tilting red sandstone layers above vertically tilted greywacke rocks.

Abraham Gottlob Werner (1749–1817) proposed Neptunism, where strata represented deposits from shrinking seas precipitated onto primordial rocks such as granite. In 1785 James Hutton proposed an opposing, self-maintaining infinite cycle based on natural history and not on the Biblical account.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref><ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> Template:Quote

Hutton then sought evidence to support his idea that there must have been repeated cycles, each involving deposition on the seabed, uplift with tilting and erosion, and then moving undersea again for further layers to be deposited. At Glen Tilt in the Cairngorm mountains he found granite penetrating metamorphic schists, in a way which indicated to him that the presumed primordial rock had been molten after the strata had formed.<ref name="Macfarlane">Template:Cite news Review of Repcheck's The Man Who Found Time</ref><ref name=tilt>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> He had read about angular unconformities as interpreted by Neptunists, and found an unconformity at Jedburgh where layers of greywacke in the lower layers of the cliff face have been tilted almost vertically before being eroded to form a level plane, under horizontal layers of Old Red Sandstone.<ref name="Unconformity Jedburgh">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> In the spring of 1788 he took a boat trip along the Berwickshire coast with John Playfair and the geologist Sir James Hall, and found a dramatic unconformity showing the same sequence at Siccar Point.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> Playfair later recalled that "the mind seemed to grow giddy by looking so far into the abyss of time",<ref name="Playfair RSE">Template:Cite news</ref> and Hutton concluded a 1788 paper he presented at the Royal Society of Edinburgh, later rewritten as a book, with the phrase "we find no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end".<ref name="KS Thomson">Template:Cite journal</ref>

Both Playfair and Hall wrote their own books on the theory, and for decades robust debate continued between Hutton's supporters and the Neptunists. Georges Cuvier's paleontological work in the 1790s, which established the reality of extinction, explained this by local catastrophes, after which other fixed species repopulated the affected areas. In Britain, geologists adapted this idea into "diluvial theory" which proposed repeated worldwide annihilation and creation of new fixed species adapted to a changed environment, initially identifying the most recent catastrophe as the biblical flood.<ref> Template:Harvnb </ref>

19th century

File:Lyell 1840.jpg

Charles Lyell at the British Association meeting in Glasgow 1840

From 1830 to 1833 Charles Lyell's multi-volume Principles of Geology was published. The work's subtitle was "An attempt to explain the former changes of the Earth's surface by reference to causes now in operation". He drew his explanations from field studies conducted directly before he went to work on the founding geology text,<ref>Wilson, Leonard G. "Charles Lyell" Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Ed. Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. VIII. Pennsylvania, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1973</ref> and developed Hutton's idea that the earth was shaped entirely by slow-moving forces still in operation today, acting over a very long period of time. The terms uniformitarianism for this idea, and catastrophism for the opposing viewpoint, was coined by William Whewell in a review of Lyell's book. Principles of Geology was the most influential geological work in the middle of the 19th century.

Systems of inorganic earth history

Geoscientists support diverse systems of Earth history, the nature of which rests on a certain mixture of views about the process, control, rate, and state which are preferred. Because geologists and geomorphologists tend to adopt opposite views over process, rate, and state in the inorganic world, there are eight different systems of beliefs in the development of the terrestrial sphere.Template:Sfn All geoscientists stand by the principle of uniformity of law. Most, but not all, are directed by the principle of simplicity. All make definite assertions about the quality of rate and state in the inorganic realm.Template:Sfn

Methodological assumption concerning kind of process	Substantive claim concerning state	Substantive claim Concerning rate	System of Inorganic Earth history	PromotersTemplate:Sfn
Same Kind of processes that exist today Actualism	Steady State Non-directionalism	Constant Rate Gradualism	Actualistic Non-directional Gradualism	Most of Hutton, Playfair, Lyell
		Changing Rate Catastrophism	Actualistic Non-directional Catastrophism	Hall
	Changing State Directionalism	Constant Rate Gradualism	Actualistic Directional Gradualism	Small part of Hutton, Cotta, Darwin
		Changing Rate Catastrophism	Actualistic Directional Catastrophism	Hooke, Steno, Lehmann, Pallas, de Saussure, Werner, and geognosists, Elis de Beaumont and followers
Different Kind of processes than exist today Non-Actualism	Steady State Non-directionalism	Constant Rate Gradualism	Non-Actualistic Non-directional Gradualism	Carpenter
		Changing Rate Catastrophism	Non-Actualistic Non-directional Catastrophism	Bonnet, Cuvier
	Changing State Directionalism	Constant Rate Gradualism	Non-Actualistic directional Gradualism	De Mallet, Buffon
		Changing Rate Catastrophism	Non-Actualistic Directional Catastrophism	Restoration cosmogonists, English diluvialists, Scriptural geologists

Lyell

Lyell's uniformitarianism is a family of four related propositions, not a single idea:Template:Sfn

• Uniformity of law – the laws of nature are constant across time and space.
• Uniformity of methodology – the appropriate hypotheses for explaining the geological past are those with analogy today.
• Uniformity of kind – past and present causes are all of the same kind, have the same energy, and produce the same effects.
• Uniformity of degree – geological circumstances have remained the same over time.

None of these connotations requires another, and they are not all equally inferred by uniformitarians.<ref>David Cahan, 2003, From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences, p 95 Template:ISBN.</ref>

Gould explained Lyell's propositions in Time's Arrow, Time's Cycle (1987), stating that Lyell conflated two different types of propositions: a pair of methodological assumptions with a pair of substantive hypotheses. The four together make up Lyell's uniformitarianism.<ref name=Gould118>Template:Harvnb</ref>

Methodological assumptions

The two methodological assumptions below are accepted to be true by the majority of scientists and geologists. Gould claims that these philosophical propositions must be assumed before you can proceed as a scientist doing science. "You cannot go to a rocky outcrop and observe either the constancy of nature's laws or the working of unknown processes. It works the other way around." You first assume these propositions and "then you go to the outcrop."<ref name=Gould120>Template:Harvnb. "You first assume."</ref>

• Uniformity of law across time and space: Natural laws are constant across space and time.<ref name=gould1987 />

The axiom of uniformity of law <ref name="gould1965"/><ref name="simpson1963"/><ref name=gould1987>Template:Harvnb, "Making inferences about the past is wrapped up in the difference between studying the observable and the unobservable. In the observable, erroneous beliefs can be proven wrong and be inductively corrected by other observations. This is Popper's principle of falsifiability. However, past processes are not observable by their very nature. Therefore, 'the invariance of nature's laws must be assumed to come to conclusions about the past."</ref> is necessary in order for scientists to extrapolate (by inductive inference) into the unobservable past.<ref name=gould1965 /><ref name=gould1987 /> The constancy of natural laws must be assumed in the study of the past; else we cannot meaningfully study it.<ref name=gould1965 /><ref name=simpson1963 /><ref name=gould1987 /><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

• Uniformity of process across time and space: Natural processes are constant across time and space.

Though similar to uniformity of law, this second a priori assumption, shared by the vast majority of scientists, deals with geological causes, not physicochemical laws.<ref>Template:Harvnb, "As such, it is another a priori methodological assumption shared by most scientists and not a statement about the empirical world."</ref> The past is to be explained by processes acting currently in time and space rather than inventing extra esoteric or unknown processes without good reason,<ref>Template:Harvnb, "We should try to explain the past by causes now in operation without inventing extra, fancy, or unknown causes, however plausible in logic, if available processes suffice."</ref><ref>Template:Harvnb, "Strict uniformitarianism may often be a guarantee against pseudo-scientific phantasies and loose conjectures, but it makes one easily forget that the principle of uniformity is not a law, not a rule established after comparison of facts, but a methodological principle, preceding the observation of facts ... It is the logical principle of parsimony of causes and of the economy of scientific notions. By explaining past changes by analogy with present phenomena, a limit is set to conjecture, for there is only one way in which two things are equal, but there is an infinity of ways in which they could be supposed different."</ref> otherwise known as parsimony or Occam's razor.

Substantive hypotheses

The substantive hypotheses were controversial and, in some cases, accepted by few.<ref name=Gould118 /> These hypotheses are judged true or false on empirical grounds through scientific observation and repeated experimental data. This is in contrast with the previous two philosophical assumptions<ref name="Gould120" /> that come before one can do science and so cannot be tested or falsified by science.

• Uniformity of rate across time and space: Change is typically slow, steady, and gradual.<ref name="Gould120" />

Uniformity of rate (or gradualism) is what most people (including geologists) think of when they hear the word "uniformitarianism", confusing this hypothesis with the entire definition. As late as 1990, Lemon, in his textbook of stratigraphy, affirmed that "The uniformitarian view of earth history held that all geologic processes proceed continuously and at a very slow pace."<ref>Lemon, R. R. 1990. Principles of stratigraphy. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publishing Company. p. 30</ref>

Gould explained Hutton's view of uniformity of rate; mountain ranges or grand canyons are built by the accumulation of nearly insensible changes added up through vast time. Some major events such as floods, earthquakes, and eruptions, do occur. But these catastrophes are strictly local. They neither occurred in the past nor shall happen in the future, at any greater frequency or extent than they display at present. In particular, the whole earth is never convulsed at once.<ref name=Gould120s>Template:Harvnb</ref>

• Uniformity of state across time and space: Change is evenly distributed throughout space and time.<ref name=Gould123>Template:Harvnb</ref>

The uniformity of state hypothesis implies that throughout the history of our earth there is no progress in any inexorable direction. The planet has almost always looked and behaved as it does now. Change is continuous but leads nowhere. The earth is in balance: a dynamic steady state.<ref name=Gould123 />

20th century

Stephen Jay Gould's first scientific paper, "Is uniformitarianism necessary?" (1965), reduced these four assumptions to two.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref> He dismissed the first principle, which asserted spatial and temporal invariance of natural laws, as no longer an issue of debate. He rejected the third (uniformity of rate) as an unjustified limitation on scientific inquiry, as it constrains past geologic rates and conditions to those of the present. So, Lyell's uniformitarianism was deemed unnecessary.

Uniformitarianism was proposed in contrast to catastrophism, which states that the distant past "consisted of epochs of paroxysmal and catastrophic action interposed between periods of comparative tranquility"<ref>William J. Whewell, Principles of Geology, Charles Leyell, vol. II, London, 1832: Quart. Rev., v. 47, p. 103-123.</ref> Especially in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, most geologists took this interpretation to mean that catastrophic events are not important in geologic time; one example of this is the debate of the formation of the Channeled Scablands due to the catastrophic Missoula glacial outburst floods. An important result of this debate and others was the re-clarification that, while the same principles operate in geologic time, catastrophic events that are infrequent on human time-scales can have important consequences in geologic history.<ref>Allen, E. A., et al., 1986, Cataclysms on the Columbia, Timber Press, Portland, OR. Template:ISBN

• "Bretz knew that the very idea of catastrophic flooding would threaten and anger the geological community. And here's why: among geologists in the 1920s, catastrophic explanations for geological events (other than volcanos or earthquakes) were considered wrong-minded to the point of heresy." p. 42.
• "Consider, then, what Bretz was up against. The very word 'Catastrophism' was heinous in the ears of geologists. ... It was a step backward, a betrayal of all that geological science had fought to gain. It was a heresy of the worst order." p. 44
• "It was inevitable that sooner or later the geological community would rise up and attempt to defeat Bretz's 'outrageous hypothesis.'" p 49
• "Nearly 50 years had passed since Bretz first proposed the idea of catastrophic flooding, and now in 1971 his arguments had become a standard of geological thinking." p. 71</ref>

Derek Ager has noted that "geologists do not deny uniformitarianism in its true sense, that is to say, of interpreting the past by means of the processes that are seen going on at the present day, so long as we remember that the periodic catastrophe is one of those processes. Those periodic catastrophes make more showing in the stratigraphical record than we have hitherto assumed."<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

Modern geologists do not apply uniformitarianism in the same way as Lyell. They question if rates of processes were uniform through time and only those values measured during the history of geology are to be accepted.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> The present may not be a long enough key to penetrating the deep lock of the past.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Geologic processes may have been active at different rates in the past that humans have not observed. "By force of popularity, uniformity of rate has persisted to our present day. For more than a century, Lyell's rhetoric conflating axiom with hypotheses has descended in unmodified form. Many geologists have been stifled by the belief that proper methodology includes an a priori commitment to gradual change, and by a preference for explaining large-scale phenomena as the concatenation of innumerable tiny changes."<ref name=Gould174>Template:Harvnb</ref>

The current consensus is that Earth's history is a slow, gradual process punctuated by occasional natural catastrophic events that have affected Earth and its inhabitants.<ref>The Columbia Encyclopedia Sixth Edition, uniformitarianism Template:Webarchive © 2007 Columbia University Press.</ref> In practice it is reduced from Lyell's conflation, or blending, to simply the two philosophical assumptions. This is also known as the principle of geological actualism, which states that all past geological action was like all present geological action. The principle of actualism is the cornerstone of paleoecology.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

Social sciences

Uniformitarianism has also been applied in historical linguistics, where it is considered a foundational principle of the field.<ref name=":0">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Linguist Donald Ringe gives the following definition:<ref name=":0" /> Template:QuoteThe principle is known in linguistics, after William Labov and associates, as the Uniformitarian Principle or Unifomitarian Hypothesis.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

See also

• Conservation law
• Noether's theorem
• Law of universal gravitation
• Astronomical spectroscopy
• Cosmological principle
• History of paleontology
• Paradigm shift
• Physical constant
• Physical cosmology
• Scientific consensus
• Time-variation of fundamental constants

References

• Template:Cite book
• Template:Cite journal
• Template:Cite journal
• Template:Cite book
• Template:Cite book
• Template:Cite book
• Template:Cite book
• Template:Cite book

Web

• {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}

• {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}

External links

• Uniformitarianism at Physical Geography
• {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation

|CitationClass=web }}

• Have physical constants changed with time?