Geology Reference
In-Depth Information
In 1817,
Blackwood's Magazine
echoed the new empirical tradition and
placed Hutton beyond the pale: "Had he studied nature, and then theorized,
his genius would in all probability, have illustrated many difficult points; but
it is obvious, from his own works, that he has frequently reversed this order
of proceeding." Davies's judgment (1969, 178) is harsh, but not, I think,
exaggerated or misplaced: "Mistitled, lacking in form, drowned in words,
deficient in field evidence, and shrouded in an overall obscurity . . . many of
those who knew of the theory only through Hutton's expositions must have
dismissed it as the worthless and indigestible fantasy of a somewhat outdated
arm-chair geologist."
Hutton, in short, never misrepresented his intent. He viewed the earth as a
body with a purpose. This purpose imposed requirements upon any rational
theory—"things which must necessarily be comprehended in the theory of
the earth, if we are to give stability to it as a world sustaining plants and
animals" (1795, I, 281). Not only did Hutton deduce the necessity of a
restorative force (the basis of cyclicity); he also stated repeatedly that his
concept of a proper, purposeful universe would collapse if such a force could
not be discovered.
When we finally discard the empiricist myth that turned Hutton into his
opposite, we can properly seek the discovery of deep time in those
a priori
concepts that Hutton viewed as the rational basis for his or any theory of the
earth. He did not find deep time or cyclicity in rocks. We can understand the
role of time's metaphors in Hutton's geology—the "bottom line" of this
chapter and book— only when we direct our search toward Hutton's
systematic thinking rather than his field explorations.
The Sources of Necessary Cyclicity
Hutton is nothing if not consistent in the cycling of repeated themes through
his thousand pages of text. Among these reiterations, no
Search WWH ::
Custom Search