Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Golden spikes, scientific types, and the ma(r)king of deep time

Bibliographic Data

ID10797987
AuthorsJoeri Witteveen (0000-0003-1291-9156)
Year2024
Volume106
Pages70-85
Publication date2024-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueStudies in History and Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0039-3681 • E-ISSN: 1879-2510
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.02.004
PMID38906073
OpenAlexW4399854635
LanguageEN
References cited55

Chronostratigraphy is the subfield of geology that studies the relative age of rock strata and that aims at producing a hierarchical classification of (global) divisions of the historical time-rock record. The 'golden spike' or 'GSSP' approach is the cornerstone of contemporary chronostratigraphic methodology. It is also perplexing. Chronostratigraphers define each global time-rock boundary extremely locally, often by driving a gold-colored pin into an exposed rock section at a particular level. Moreover, they usually avoid rock sections that show any meaningful sign of paleontological disruption or geological discontinuity: the less obvious the boundary, the better. It has been argued that we can make sense of this practice of marking boundaries by comparing the status and function of golden spikes to that of other concrete, particular reference standards from other sciences: holotypes from biological taxonomy and measurement prototypes from the metrology of weight and measures. Alisa Bokulich (2020b) has argued that these 'scientific types' are in an important sense one of a kind: they have a common status and function. I will argue that this picture of high-level conceptual unity is mistaken and fails to consider the diversity of aims and purposes of standardization and classification across the sciences. I develop an alternative, disunified account of scientific types that shows how differences in ontological attitudes and epistemic aims inform scientists' choices between different kinds of scientific types. This perspective on scientific types helps to make sense of an intriguing mid-twentieth-century debate among chronostratigraphers about the very nature of their enterprise. Should chronostratigraphers conventionally make boundaries by designating golden spikes, or should they attempt to mark pre-existing 'natural' boundaries with the help of a different kind of scientific type

Deep time · Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping · Philosophy and History of Science · Research Data Management Practices · Geology · Paleontology

  • Of Records and Ruins

    Open Access•Adrian Currie•Journal of the Philosophy of…•2023

  • Biological taxon names are descriptive names

    Open Access•Jerzy A Brzozowski•History & Philosophy of the Life…•2020

  • Taxon names and varieties of reference

    Open Access•Joeri Witteveen•History & Philosophy of the Life…•2021

  • Necessity, The A Priori, And The Standard Meter

    Open Access•Eric J Loomis, Eric Loomis•Synthese•1999

  • How Accurate Is the Standard Second

    Open Access•Eran Tal•Philosophy of Science•2011

  • Calibration, Coherence, and Consilience in Radiometric Measures of Geologic Time

    Open Access•Alisa Bokulich•Philosophy of Science•2020

  • Measuring Time with Fossils

    Open Access•Max Dresow•Philosophy of Science•2021

  • The varved succession of Crawford Lake, Milton, Ontario, Canada as a candidate Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point for the Anthropocene series

    Open Access•Francine Mg Mccarthy, Robert T Patterson et al.•The Anthropocene Review•2023

  • Type Specimens and Scientific Memory

    Lorraine Daston, Daston et al.•Critical Inquiry•2004

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae