The place and power of myth in geoscience: An associate editor's perspective

Abstract

Distinguishing between myth and science is subtle, for both seek to understand the things around us. The characteristic style of mythic thinking is to place special emphasis on a selective conjecture, based typically on the initial observation or recognition of a phenomenon, which is thereafter given privileged status over alternate interpretations. Concepts in geoscience are quite commonly mythic in that sense. The outdated notion of geosynclines as deterministic precursors of orogeny is an apt example, as are central current ideas about suspect terranes, mantle plumes, and global sequence stratigraphy. Geomyths stimulate investigation, but also may retard further progress by dismissing contrary views. Improved understanding of geologic history could be attained more efficaciously by appreciating the mythic quality of many nascent ideas in geoscience, and resisting the temptation to accord geomyths favored status over competing hypotheses.