Abstract
Maps provide an interesting and significant contrast to the sorts of quantitative information that we have discussed hitherto. First, they are not affected by the “magic number” syndrome; although they can be used to make strong or contentious claims, they do not possess the aura of objective truth in the same way as numbers. Because of this cultural difference, maps are now generally accepted as being the product of human creation, embodying policies, prejudices and error. The imperfections in maps are therefore not an occasion for dismay; nor do philosophers need to argue that somehow they still belong in a Platonic heaven of quantitative science. Modifications in maps are generally appreciated as being the result of changes in both scientific knowledge and political realities: philosophers have not needed to articulate general theories of “cartographical falsifiability” or “cartographical revolutions”.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1990 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Funtowicz, S.O., Ravetz, J.R. (1990). Maps. In: Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. Theory and Decision Library, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0621-1_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0621-1_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6766-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-0621-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive