122 W. M. DAVIS RELATION OF GEOGRAPHY TO GEOLOGY 



values for Carboniferous time and for today, just as the elements of two 

 morvans, one in France, the other in Colorado, have different values. Xo ; 

 the difference between these two investigations would not lie so much in 

 the unlikeness of their content as in the inherently speculative character 

 and the inevitable incompleteness of one and the largely observational 

 character and the eventually attainable completeness of the other. The 

 speculative character of all conclusions regarding the earth's past history 

 is indeed, when once recognized, so striking that it becomes a matter of 

 surprise to see that geology is largely taught as an observational science, 

 and that direct instruction in the best methods of speculation is ordinarily 

 neglected. 



REASONS FOR MAINTAINING EACH AS A SEPARATE SCIENCE 



If, then, the content of geology, the long past of the earth, and of 

 geography, the momentary present, are so much alike, wdiy should we 

 make two sciences of them and organize two societies for their cultiva- 

 tion? Chiefly for practical reasons. The degree to which specialization 

 is carried in these modern times demands the division of various subjects 

 that really have a logical unity of content. And among the most im- 

 portant of these practical reasons is that the separation of one group from 

 the whole body of considerations to which the group belongs promotes 

 the concentration of interest and attention on that group, and thus aids 

 its progress. It is only some twenty years ago that geologists and biolo- 

 gists were united in the Society of American Naturalists, and the meet- 

 ings of that society were so interesting that when it was proposed to seg- 

 regate the geologists in a society of their own I was one of those who 

 doubted the wisdom of such a step. But the organization of the Geo- 

 logical Society of America has been so beneficial to our science that, far 

 from opposing further subdivision, I took an active part in promoting it 

 when eight years ago a few of us, mostly members of this society, formed 

 the Association of American Geographers; and here again the results 

 gained from independent organization have fully justified the partial 

 isolation that our separation entailed. Our relations are still close, so 

 close indeed that besides a good number of interchangeable members and 

 a somewhat too large number of interchangeable papers, we have in two 

 cases had interchangeable presidents, and as the second one of these I 

 hold it to be a great honor to find myself to that extent in the same cate- 

 gory with the first one. 



