Concept of geographic space. Fundamentals of the doctrine of geographical location Space object of study of geography concept of geographical location

I offer you a fragment of a geography lesson in the profile (socio-economic) grade 11 on the topic: "The geographical position of the city."

I conducted this lesson within the framework of the city seminar "Social design as a form of organization of civic education in the context of profiling a general education institution."

Since 2008, I have been working on the innovative educational and methodological complex “Geography. profile level. Grade 10-11”, which became the winner of the competition of the National Fund for Personnel Training “Informatization of the education system”. Author IUMK V.N. Kholina - Candidate of Geographical Sciences, Head of the Department of Regional Economics and Geography Faculty of Economics Russian University Friendship between nations.

Download:

Preview:

Dear colleagues!

I offer you a fragment of a lesson in the profile grade 11 on the topic: "Geographical location of the city."

Here is a matrix card that will help you determine the place of this topic in the pre-profile and profile geography courses:

Subject	The geographical position of the city
Class
Place in the curriculum	Section No. 3 "Population of Russia"	Section No. 2 "Regions of Russia"	Section No. 1 "Geography in the modern world"	Section No. 5 "Cities and rural settlements"
	Topic #14 "Where and how people live"	Topic #3 "European part of Russia"	Topic #1 "Geography as a science"	Topic #1 "Urbanization"
	Lesson No. 63 “Resettlement and urbanization. Types of settlements»	Lesson number 25 "Moscow is the capital of Russia"	Lesson number 4 "Space - the object of study of geography"	Lesson #4 "Why some cities grow and others don't"
	Lesson No. 64 "Cities of Russia, historical features of formation"	Lesson No. 26 "Cities of the Central District"	Lesson No. 5 "Geographical location as a factor in the emergence and development of cities"	Lesson #5 "Why some cities grow and others don't"
	Lesson number 65 "Cities of the Rostov region"	Lesson #30 "Cities on old waterways"
		Lesson No. 31 "St. Petersburg - the "economic hub" of Russia"
		Lesson No. 32 "St. Petersburg - the" second capital "of Russia"
		Lesson number 38 "The largest cities of the Volga region"
		Lesson number 50 "Cities of the Urals"
Lesson Objectives	educational: 1. To study how the process of urbanization took place in Russia. 2. Study the typology and functions of cities. 3. To study the importance of cities in the material and spiritual life of the population. 4. Get to know the problems of cities. developing: 1. Develop the ability to analyze statistical data, maps.	educational: 1. Acquaintance with the cities of Russia as centers for the formation of customs and traditions of the Russian people. 2. Acquaintance with cities as industrial hubs, their importance in the country's economy. 3. Introduction to environmental issues cities. developing: 1. Formation of the ability to characterize the city (industrial unit) on maps and diagrams.	educational: 1. The study of the object and subject of study of geography. 2. Explore the concept geographical location. developing: 1. Skill development: Work with various sources of information; Comparison of cartographic materials; 2. Development of card reading skills.	educational: 1. Form an idea of the geographical location of cities as a factor in their growth (decline) and development. developing: 1. Development of geographical thinking skills. 2. Development of the ability to work with various sources of information.
Practical work	No. 17 "Drawing on a contour map of cities of millionaires, an explanation of the features of their placement on the territory of the country"	No. 9 "Comparison of cities by transport and geographical location, historical, cultural and economic role in the life of the country"	No. 1 "Geographical location as a factor in the emergence and development of cities"	No. 1 "Choosing a place for building a city"
Objectives of practical work	1. To form an idea of the uneven distribution of cities of millionaires across the territory of the Russian Federation. 2. Identification of the main zone of settlement	1. To form an idea of the various functions, the role of cities in the meaning of the country	1. To form an idea about the influence of the factor of geographical location on the emergence of cities and about the change in this factor over time. 2. Develop the analytical abilities of students.

So, you see that we begin to study the geographical position of the city on the pre profile level in grades 8, 9, updating this topic at the profile level in grades 10, 11.

Teacher: Guys, now we will perform with you practical work"Selection of a site for the construction of the city."

Objective:

To form an idea about the influence of the geographical location factor on the emergence of cities and about the change in this factor over time.

Develop students' analytical skills.

You know that the GP is the most important spatial resource for the development of the economy, it affects not only the choice of a place for the construction of economic facilities (enterprises), cities, but also actively influences their functioning.

Let's recall the factors that influence the choice of the optimal location for the creation of cities.

Students:

Agro-climatic resources (at the initial stages of the development of society, climate, relief, and the availability of fresh water were important).

Division of labor (initially, cities played the function of a fortress, protection from enemy attacks, with the advent of crafts, trade relations arose between the settlements, which led to the appearance of food surpluses, providing the opportunity for the growth and development of the city).

Natural resources (which played an important role in the industrialization of society, for example, metallurgy originated where coal and iron deposits are compactly located).

Highways (crossings of major or convenient national or international trade routes).

Teacher: And now you need to choose the best place to place the city in different historical periods and justify your choice using the factors that we just talked about.

Working with interactive:Students take turns going to the board, doing the task, explaining their choice.

Student 1: (1600) reads the task, chooses the letter A, explains his choice.

I think that at point A, the most optimal place for building a city, because it is located near the river, and these are fresh water reserves, a cheap vehicle, access to the ocean, there is a possibility for the growth of this city.

Switches the task, reads, answers all questions, concludes: The main factors in choosing a place: protection from attack, prospects for the growth of the city, the availability of drinking water.

Teacher : And there is such a city on the map, let's see historical background:

Most coastal cities are located in convenient bays. However, in subsequent centuries, these advantages of geographical location may not be realized.

In addition to the bay, an important advantage of the geographical position of New York was the full-flowing river. Hudson, which sea vessels could rise to Albany. In 1825, the Erie Canal was laid from the Hudson to the Great Lakes, New York became the main link in the cheapest waterway from the reclaimed Midwest to the coast. By the time the railroads became the main transport, New York, it would seem, should lose the advantages of its geographical position, it had already gained enormous potential, becoming the undisputed leader among cities not only in the United States, but also in the world.

Student 2: (1830) reads the task, chooses the letter B, explains his choice.

I think that point B is the most optimal place for building a city, because there is access to the ocean, which means that it is possible to build a convenient bay. Switches the task, reads, answers all questions, concludes: The main factors in choosing a place: proximity to the ocean (external relations).

Teacher: the main factors can also include a convenient location for protection against attacks, the proximity of the PR - the forest, as a building material and a source of heating.

Student 3: (1860) reads the task, chooses the letter A, explains his choice.

I think that point A is the most optimal place for building a city, because there is fresh water, Railway, and this is the intersection of transport routes.

Switches the task, reads, answers all questions, concludes that she made a mistake, chooses point D, performs the task again, indicating the same factors, given that there is no threat of flooding.

The main factor: transport accessibility.

Student 4: (1890) reading an assignment.

Analyzing the plan of the area, I can say that the factor of transport accessibility will play a role in choosing the optimal location of the city, but here an environmental problem arises.

Teacher: Considering that in 1890 the environmental factor was not taken into account, because traffic was not as intense and the automobile industry was only in its infancy.

I think that point B is the most optimal place for building a city, because transport accessibility can be traced here.

Switches the task, reads, answers all questions, concludes:

The main factors for choosing a place: transport accessibility.

Teacher:

Conclusion: the choice of a place for the construction of a particular city is determined both by the profitability of the GP and by the peculiarities of the location. The significance of these factors depends on the historical period and changes with the course of the socio-economic development of society.

Write an analytical report on how the role of GP factors has changed in the course of the development of society and the economy.

Student presentations…….

Teacher: With the development of society and the economy, the role of GP factors changed:

At first it was protection from hostile Indians and communication with the Old World (convenient bays).

Then the presence of wood as a building material and a source of heating.

Transport accessibility (crossing of highways).

Student and - ecological.

Teacher: Yes, now when choosing the optimal location of the city, an orientation towards the environmental factor is also added.

Homework:You should use the influence of this factor when filling out the map of the optimal location of the city in 2007 in your workbook on page 5.

The subject of geography, in the broadest sense, is the spatial characteristics of the earth's surface. However, the very concept of space, which, at first glance, seems intuitively clear, does not at all belong to the category of completely indisputable and unambiguous concepts. Therefore, it seems appropriate, at least briefly, to touch upon the problems associated with understanding this category both in science in general and in geography in particular. In addition, here it would also be appropriate to consider such concepts related to the definition of geographical space as distance, its measurement and display on the map.

Any spatial characteristics, one way or another, relate to relative position objects. However, the arrangement of molecules in crystal lattice or star systems in the galaxy, although they are spatial arrangements, the geographer, however, is not at all interested. Geographical space has a well-defined scale, beyond which are both too small and too small. large objects and distance. But what does "too much" mean? How can one express the scale of those objects and distances that are in the field of view of geography? Obviously, this can be done in at least two ways.

First, one can specify a range of units used to measure geographic features and distances between them, specifying, for example, that the area of interest of geography extends over an area of the physical surface of the Earth and includes objects and distances measured on scales from units of meters to thousands of kilometers along the surface and up to tens of kilometers in height and depth.

Secondly, it is possible to define the sphere of geographical knowledge by pointing to the forms of human activity that are carried out within its subject area, and for which, in fact, this scientific discipline is created and serves: sea, land and air communications, fixing the locations of vital resources and ensuring the most efficient access to them, optimizing the distribution of forms of management in accordance with the characteristics of climatic zones, demarcating state borders and delimiting spheres of political and economic influence, etc.

When comparing these methods, it can be noted that if in the first case the definition of the sphere of geographical knowledge is carried out according to quantitative parameters, then in the second - according to qualitative parameters. As a result, in both cases we will get areas that have approximately the same external boundaries, but are very different in their internal characteristics.

In the first case, geographic space is represented as a set of dimensions and distances expressed in universal and homogeneous physical or mathematical units: meters, degrees, etc. In the second, geographic space does not have a single universal unit of measurement, since dimensions and distances turn out to be dependent on the forms of activity, in relation to which they are determined: they can be measured, for example, by travel time or by the amount of costs; moreover, they can change due to a change in the forms of activity: changing vehicles, laying roads, etc. Thus, the internal space of the selected areas, with the commonality of their external borders, seems in the first case objectively given and independent of us, in the second case - determined in relation to the ways of organizing activities and, therefore, dependent on our subjectivity.

The idea of space as some kind of objective reality, the metrical characteristics of which are absolutely constant and independent of any subjective factors, is formed within the framework of the objectivist paradigm, which goes back to Eratosthenes. Geographical doctrines developed within the framework of this paradigm recent centuries, relied on the Newtonian concept of space as a universal receptacle for all material objects, representing a special kind of substance, whose own characteristics are independent of its content, just as the own characteristics of a vessel containing this content are independent of the content. As noted by the famous English philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970): “For Newton, space, like time, was 'absolute'; this means that it consists of a set of points, each of which is devoid of structure and represents a finite constituent part of the physical world. Each point is eternal and unchanging; the change lies in the fact that the point is sometimes "occupied" by one part of matter, then another, and sometimes remains unoccupied.

For Newton himself, it was this concept that served as one of the fundamental foundations of his theological constructions, in which absolute space was identified with God. But it was also laid at the foundation of it. scientific theories, since it was on it that the basic physical laws derived by him were built. Thanks to the authority of Newton, this concept of space was widely used in modern European science and was (in an implicit, unreflected form) accepted by most geographers as one of the paradigmatic settings that do not need special justification, since they are taken for granted. It was the paradigmatic nature of this concept that ensured both its widest dissemination and extreme stability. Despite the fact that during the 19th century the Newtonian concept of absolute space gradually lost popularity, and then was almost completely replaced from physics by the theory of relativity, in the field of geography it continued to maintain its dominant position until the middle of the 20th century. So, for example, D. Harvey, characterizing the situation in geography, notes: “The assumption of the absoluteness of space was not explicitly discussed by geographers ... It seems, therefore, that geographers adhered to a special view of space, which differed from that accepted in the philosophy of science.”

In general, the habitual notion of space that is formed on the basis of Euclidean geometry, which seems to modern man for granted and almost innate, actually arises in the process of a rather long and complex evolution. Psychologists have established that the mechanism of visual perception of space is based not on Euclidean geometry, but on geometry with negative curvature, which has spatial characteristics corresponding to Lobachevsky's constructions. The further development of spatial perceptions is due to historical tradition and is carried out as a result of the formation and subsequent development by each person of the cultural heritage of the society to which he belongs. At the same time, each culture develops its own forms of spatial perceptions, which differ both from each other and from the original natural forms. Thus, our ability to perceive space "according to Euclid" is the result of training and habit. The Swiss Jean Piaget (1896-1980), known for his work on the psychology of the child, shows in his research that children come to the concepts of Euclidean geometry at a relatively late age, going from topological representations (closer, farther, higher, lower, etc.). At the same time, their ability to schematically display space is significantly affected by the degree of mastery of linguistic symbols and signs intended for this purpose. The absence of the latter in the cultural tradition, as is the case with many primitive peoples, makes it impossible to schematically reproduce complex spatial relationships. So, for example, Ernst Cassirer (1874-1945), characterizing the thinking of primitive peoples, noted: “They orient themselves in space better and more accurately than people of a civilized society, but their spatial existence lies entirely in the field of concrete sensations. Although they thoroughly know every corner in the surrounding area, for example, every bend of the river, they are not able to depict the outlines of this river, fix them in the form of a certain spatial scheme. The transition from simple actions to drawing up a diagram, to a symbol, to an image, is in any case a true "critical phase" in the awareness of space. Thus, it can be considered established that spatial concepts are associated with the characteristics of the culture in which they were formed. At the same time, one can hardly say that the spatial concepts of any of the cultures are “better”, in the sense that they more adequately reflect the space as it exists in itself, “in fact”.

Today, ethnographers state the presence of diverse systems of spatial representations that exist in various communities. Such diversity would hardly be possible if they were based on some single "true" space, similar to Newton's "absolute container" of all objects. In fact, the formation of spatial representations is by no means a simple “reflection” of a certain “real” space that exists independently of our consciousness, as an absolutely independent “objective reality”. In the formation of systems of spatial representations, in addition to mapping real-life things and phenomena, a huge role is played by mental constructions, which, not arising from empirical experience, at the same time act as a necessary basis for its organization. Mental constructions of this kind include the concepts of "emptiness", "infinity", etc., the meaning of which is determined not by empirical, but by cultural content, and, above all, by language. Concepts of this kind do not have, and cannot have, any empirical content, and, nevertheless, they become necessary components of developed systems of spatial representations, since they can talk about recreating images of not only present, but also absent objects. The solution of many geographical problems, as noted, for example, by D. Harvey, “depends on the existence of spatial concepts suitable for this purpose ... and if culture does not develop [them], then it will not even be possible to speak clearly about the spatial aspects of the world ... A cultural heritage devoid of such elements will make it impossible to develop certain types of activities and solve many practical problems. Since the conceptual schemes of spatial representations are culturally determined, they are not only diverse, but also changing over time. Moreover, this applies not only to geographical space, but also to physical space. Thus, it can be stated that it is impossible to fully understand the geographical concepts of space without taking into account the general spatial representations rooted in the language, art, science, and even in the mythology of the culture that interests us. And in this regard, even Newton's idea of an absolute space with a single Euclidean metric arises as a result of a culturally conditioned choice fixed by tradition and only a few centuries later turned into something "self-evident" for everyday consciousness.

The cultural conditioning of spatial representations, in turn, suggests that the vision of the Earth by each individual person may well be considered individual, since it depends on his personal habits and attitudes. Therefore, the conceptual constructions of geographical theories, on the one hand, may differ from each other, but on the other hand, they perform an integrating function, reducing the infinite variety of vague individual ideas to a limited number of fairly strictly defined and clearly articulated concepts. At the same time, in the formation of these concepts themselves, two divergent trends can be found, one of which focuses on universality, and the other on the uniqueness of ideas about the earth's surface, which in the first case is considered as space, and in the second as place (chora). As William Bunge notes: "This dispute between space and place directly reflects positions in the correlation of the universal and the unique."

Geography studies the objects on the earth's surface and the processes that cause changes in their location. Studying the earth's surface, geographers divide it into segments or sections of various sizes and configurations, thus structuring their object. This structuring is a general rule scientific research and is always associated with the selection of typical elements, which together form a certain integral system, which is considered as the subject area of the corresponding science. However, in geography there are at least two ways of structuring a subject area.

An area of the earth's surface can be distinguished by indicating its location in a certain universal coordinate system. Each area identified in this way is considered as homogeneous with other areas, in the selection of which quantitative characteristics acquire decisive importance, while qualitative differences fade into the background. But a site can also be distinguished by pointing to its own features, which distinguish it from others not by its position in the coordinate system, but by the totality of its qualitative characteristics. Depending on which method the geographer prefers, his attention will be focused on the quantitative (quantitative) or qualitative (qualitative) features of the object, which is also reflected in the difference in names. Geographical objects, allocated according to quantitative characteristics, are usually called territories, distinguished by qualitative features - regions. As a result, we get those two types of geography, which were discussed earlier.

The choice in favor of a quantitative structuring of the earth's surface, in turn, gives rise to the desire to create a single "universal geography", since all geographical objects are considered as basically homogeneous. To arrange such objects in one single "universal" way seems not only possible, but also absolutely necessary to ensure the scientific rigor of geographical knowledge. Qualitative structuring makes it possible to avoid such a rigid understanding of the rigor of scientific theories, since it does not associate scientific character with the requirement of the indispensable uniqueness and universality of knowledge that claims to be true. Since any object is multi-qualitative, taking various qualities as the basis for structuring, one can obtain various "regional geography", none of which can claim the status of "universal". Thus, we get differently oriented systems of cognition: the first is an expression of monistic, and the second - pluralistic worldviews.

Each of the considered systems prefers to use specific language tools that are maximally adapted, respectively, either to indicate locations or to determine the properties of the objects under study. As a result, within the framework of the science of the earth's surface, two languages are formed: spatial and substantial, which turns out to be very significant for the methodology of geography. Since the way of describing, highlighting and grouping geographic objects can be twofold: according to spatial coordinates or according to the specific features of the regions, in the geographical literature, as D. Harvey notes, "there is often a mixture of these two types, which leads to serious confusion." The substantial concept of space assumes that both the selection of an object and the indication of its location can and should be carried out in relation to a single and only "true" coordinate system that expresses the properties of absolute space "as such". The relational (relative) concept allows for the ambiguity of spatial definitions, since, focusing not so much on the properties of space as on the properties of an object, it suggests that coordinate systems can change depending on which of the qualitative characteristics interests us in the first place. At the same time, even if within any of the many possible coordinate systems the position of an object can be determined uniquely, the number of such systems seems to be infinite, just as the properties of any object themselves are infinite.

But, agreeing with the relativity of space, we immediately find ourselves forced to doubt the correctness of one of the most familiar spatial representations firmly assimilated during the almost three hundred years of the dominance of the Newtonian concept. We are talking about the idea that the distance between points on the earth's surface is an objectively given and constant value. If we assume there is various systems coordinates, we must recognize that the distance between objects can change, depending on which coordinate system we choose. In other words, we must recognize the dependence of the distances between objects on the subjective factor. Thus, the recognition of the relativity of space poses a problem for the geographer that is completely redundant in an absolute system: before determining the location of an object, it is necessary to select a coordinate system that best corresponds to the form of human activity in which the geographical objects of interest to us are “located”. In this case, geography can no longer be considered as a purely natural science, since it approaches disciplines whose subject matter is not physical objects that exist independently of human activity, but this activity itself in its various forms. Since the concept of absolute space can be considered as a special case of the subjective choice of a certain coordinate system, the very opposition of "general" and "regional" geography is smoothed to such an extent that, as Bunge notes, their separation begins to appear "artificial and harmful." This convergence of physical and economic geography concerns not only the subject, but also the methodology; in the end, it turns out to be so tight that “the methods for solving spatial problems, originally developed in the analysis of the movement of cars on freeways, turn out to be suitable for studying the regime of rivers.”

Distances and their measurement. The definition of geography as the science of the spatial characteristics of the earth's surface entails a direct conclusion about the exclusively great importance for a given area of knowledge of the concept distances. This is confirmed by the fact that very often geography itself is called the "science of distances." But on closer examination of this seemingly intuitive concept, as in many other cases, some ambiguities arise. Indeed, on the one hand, it seems that the distance between two points is an objectively determined quantity and completely independent of our subjective considerations. Measured in different units, it can, of course, have different numerical values, but still this one will only different ways expressions of the same actual distance of one object from another. But, on the other hand, if distance is one of the most important characteristics of spatial relations, and the spatial characteristics themselves, as we established earlier, can in principle be dependent on subjective factors, the question arises as to whether this dependence on subjectivity extends to the certainty of distances? In other words, can we assert the real dependence of the distances between objects on subjective factors, such as, for example, how to overcome these distances. And it seems that we will be forced to recognize such a dependence if we set the task of determining the distance not simply as the ratio of two points tightly “attached” to imaginary grid lines, but in connection with the practical task of actually moving from one such point to another. Real movement will require real efforts to overcome the resistance of the environment; but in this case, the seemingly objective concepts of "further" and "closer" begin to correlate with the subjective concepts of "harder" and "easier". In this case, the usual intuition of distance as an objective reality becomes doubtful and we are again forced to return to the question of what is distance?

It can be considered established that the measurements of distances are rather rigidly connected with the geometry of space and either proceed from it or lead to it. The adoption of this or that concept of distance is of great importance, because it not only determines the nature of the metric of geographical space, but also affects the entire theoretical concept of geographical science as a whole, since it is most directly related to the understanding that, in fact, this space there is.

If we proceed from the Newtonian concept of absolute space, then its metric should remain uniform, isotropic and unchanged. It must strictly comply with the axiomatics of Euclid's geometry, according to which the only "true" distances between objects on the Earth are the "shortest", which correspond to the arcs of great circles drawn on the surface of the Earth. At the same time, any task of determining the distance seems to be completely solvable exclusively by mathematical means using elementary trigonometry. However, since the middle of the 20th century, this point of view, although still quite widespread, is no longer considered intuitively clear and is not generally accepted.

Gradually, the view is becoming more and more widespread, according to which the measurement of distances should be carried out in connection with certain types of spatial interactions that take place both in the sphere of human activity and in natural world. This new idea of distance correlates with the concept of space relativity, according to which there is no single absolute metric that could be used in measuring distances and analyzing locations without taking into account the specifics of the forms of activity associated, including with the measurement of distances. Therefore, distances can only be measured in connection with certain processes and activities. And this, in turn, means that there is no single absolute metric, the use of which would make it possible to unambiguously determine the only “true” distance between objects. Yes, the very concept true distance becomes problematic.

Distance itself may differ from remoteness, which is an evaluative category and, as such, has a social or psychological connotation. And if the distance can almost always be expressed in absolute quantitative units, then relative definitions (closer, farther, etc.) are often quite enough to assess the remoteness. In that case, through remoteness we express not so much a purely geometric distance as availability object for its practical achievement. But you can find a way to quantify accessibility. In economic geography, for example, these can be transport costs, in the spread of innovations, the intensity of contacts, in migration processes, arrays of intermediate opportunities, etc. But in any case, ways to overcome such remoteness may be different from the trajectories drawn along the arcs of the Euclidean distances. And then we can formulate a generalized concept of distance, connecting quantitative and qualitative certainty. Distance in this sense should be understood not simply as the distance expressed in kilometers from BUT before AT, and accessibility AT for its interaction with BUT. Or, in other words, distance is an expression of the interaction of objects. But in this case, the dependence of the distance on the way this interaction is carried out becomes quite obvious. And in this sense, the distance should be distinguished from the geometric distance between objects. And although this understanding of distance is most obvious in the field of human activity, it can also be true for the interaction of natural objects (a beam of light passing through a plane-parallel plate, for example).

Ways to measure distances either start from a certain geometry or lead to it. AT this case we have established that the metric of space is determined by specific activities or, more broadly, by the ways in which objects interact. And then we can express and evaluate the spatial structures of the earth's surface not only in kilometers or in degrees of a geodetic grid, but also in terms of travel time, in monetary costs, in the intensity of social contacts, etc. Distance, therefore, cannot always be measured in quantitative terms expressed number reference units (kilometers, miles, etc.), it can also be determined by expressing it in comparative qualitative estimates(close - far), always having a psychological or social, i.e. subjective background.

What has been said about distance, as one of the most important characteristics of spatial relations, will also be true for space as such - it also has not only quantitative, but also quality certainty. This means that the formation of structures of spatial mutual arrangements of objects (considered, for example, on the basis of closer - farther) is largely determined by the quality characterized by the degree of their remoteness or proximity to each other. “In order to comprehend the processes that form the spatial structures of geography,” Bunge says on this occasion, “it is possible and necessary to evaluate distances in terms of monetary costs, travel time, the possibility of social contacts, etc.”

During the twentieth century, the idea of the essence and measure of distance in geography has changed significantly. First of all, this change is associated with the realization of the impossibility of determining the measure of distance, regardless of the features specific activity associated with its overcoming or measurement. The metric of space is determined by a specific type of activity and its influence on the objects under consideration. With such an understanding of space k, all distances become relative, and it is no longer possible to uniquely identify them with the corresponding lengths of arcs of the great circle. But in this case, the spherical shape of the earth's surface also becomes just one of the possible shapes. The parameters of its spatial characteristics may change, as they reflect the specific features of various activities; as a result, the corresponding geodesic lines turn out to be much more complicated than the arcs of great circles. That is why, as D. Harvey notes, “at present, geographers, apparently, are satisfied with the development of special measures of distance for each specific task and do not strive to construct a general theory of geometric surfaces.

Map as a model of geographical space. A huge role in the formation and fixation of knowledge about the earth's surface belongs to maps, which are often considered as an integral part of geography, acting as a universal language of this science. Pointing to the important place of cartography in the structure of geographical knowledge, the famous American scientist Richard Hartshorne noted: “if the problem posed in the study does not allow fundamental research with the help of maps ... it is not clear whether such a study belongs to the field of geography or not. Even in a purely formal sense, it is quite possible to represent a geographical map as a specific language that has its own syntactic structure and possesses all the necessary pragmatic and semantic characteristics. Many philosophers and methodologists of science, speaking about the representation of reality in the system scientific knowledge, are often used as an analogy to explain the reflection of reality in its theoretical model, namely a geographical map. However, in reality, a geographical map is not a direct reflection of objective reality. It is not a model of the world, but rather, as D. Harvey says, "a model of the theory about the structure of the real world." Therefore, cartographic constructions are always associated with the implementation of certain ideological attitudes and conceptual schemes of spatial relations.

Until very recently, the vast majority of geographical maps corresponded to the objectivist concept of absolute space, which has a purely Euclidean metric. However, in reality, such maps were built as figurative models of the earth's surface, corresponding not so much to this surface itself, as to the "self-evident" ideas of most geographers about how should look like the Earth in terms of Newton's physics and Euclid's geometry. The degree of conviction in the truth of these ideas remained almost as high as in the time of Newton, in the year of whose death (1727) - Joseph Delisle, wrote: “Soon, when the whole Earth will be measured and accurate maps will be created, the task of the geographer will be reduced to to know these works and be able to use them. The “self-evidence” of the Euclidean-Newtonian model of space seemed to be sufficient reason to consider it quite acceptable (if not the only possible one) to use it in describing spatial characteristics relating not only to physical, but also to socio-economic objects. This usage rested on the tacit assumption that the relative positions of objects in the space of socio-economic relations can be adequately expressed using conceptual schemes that are successfully used in describing physical space. However, space, as it became clear by the middle of the 20th century, is not a single and only “God-given” objective (physical) reality. The conceptual schemes of spatial structures are no more (but no less) than the result of a subjective choice once made, to which only the duration and strength of tradition gives the appearance of pure objectivity. In fact, the schematization of spatial structures is always due to the intentionality (orientation) of our consciousness to solve certain practical problems. Given this, we must agree that the conceptual schemes of spatial relations are contextual in nature: considered in the contexts of various activities, they can not only differ from the usual ones, but also change when changing contexts.

Much of the material that traditionally made up the content of general geographic maps was chosen at one time because it was more necessary for geographers of the past to collect just such data. So, for example, maps of the XVII-XVIII centuries. were, for the most part, "charts of navigators"; hence their increased attention to the location of continents and islands, to the outline of coastlines, to the directions of currents and winds. Fixed by tradition, they become the structure-forming elements of any maps, since all other elements are located in relation to them. The twentieth century, giving rise to many new ways of doing things, forces us to change the usual ideas about the degree of importance of cartographic elements. And this is realized, first of all, not even by professional geographers, but by people who carry out these new forms of activity. After all, they have to “in their own skin” feel the inadequacy of traditional approaches, which is why it is they who begin to “correct” them on their own. geographic Maps, in relation to the conditions of their own activities. Here is how, for example, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry describes such a transformation of the traditional “navigator’s card” into a “pilot’s card”: “Now I realized that you comprehend the meaning of the visible world only through culture, through knowledge and your craft.<…>There are too few landing sites in Spain - if there is even a slight breakdown, will I find shelter, will I be able to land? I bent over the map like over a barren desert, and found no answer. And on the eve of a decisive battle ... I went to Guillaume.<…>That was a strange geography lesson! He was not talking about Guadis, but about three orange trees that grow on the edge of a field near Guadis. "Beware, mark them on the map..." And from that hour on, three trees took up more space on my map than the Sierra Nevada.<…>Thus we extracted from oblivion, from the unimaginable given the smallest details, of which no geographer has any idea. After all, geographers are only interested in the Ebro, whose waters quench their thirst big cities. But they don't care about the brook that hides in the grass to the west of Motril - the breadwinner and drinker of three dozen wildflowers. "Beware of this stream, it spoils the field ... Put it on the map too." Oh yes, I will remember the Motril snake!<…>Hiding in the grass hundreds and hundreds of kilometers away, she lay in wait for me on the edge of the saving field. At the first opportunity, she would turn me into a sheaf of fire.<…>So little by little, Spain on my map ... became some kind of fairy-tale country. I marked landing pads and dangerous traps with crosses. He noted the farmer on the mountain and the stream in the meadow. He diligently mapped a shepherd with thirty rams, just like in a song, a shepherdess neglected by geographers.

Habitually considered the main elements of geographical maps in the context of non-traditional tasks, they may turn out to be useless, and even hindering the perception of the essence of the spatial relations under consideration. In this regard, Bunge notes that "the traditional elements of a geographical map are burdensome for those who deal with human geography." In this regard, he proposes, taking into account the sharply increased role of rail transport and, accordingly, the reduced transport significance of rivers, to change the degree of their expression on geographical maps. Moreover, changes of this kind may concern not only individual objects located on the earth's surface, but also its very form. So, for example, the same Bunge expresses the idea that the traditional image of the forms of the high-altitude relief of the area can be replaced by the "relief" of the population density. As a result, we will get an image of not a physical, but a “demographic” space, on the “surface” of which areas of clusters of cities will look like high-mountainous regions, and territories with a uniform population density will look like flat plains. And, although the “demographic” surface of the Earth may look completely different than the usual physical one, for solving many very real problems it will be much more informative than the latter, since, for example, for economic geography, the configuration of population clusters is much more important than the outlines of the boundaries between water and dry.

In view of the foregoing, it turns out that the concept of a surface, like the concept of distance, is relative. In fact, the surface always turns out to be something that we accepted as such. So ordinary geographical maps, in essence, are maps bottom air ocean, which in this case accepted for the surface of the earth. However, it is quite possible to imagine situations when by the surface we mean the relief of the bottom of the water ocean, the configuration of the occurrence of rocks in the depths of the Earth or the upper layers of the atmosphere. If, however, we take into account that the field of our attention may be the cost of time, transport tariffs, or even such exotic functions.

Geographical space is most often interpreted as a philosophical conceptual category, as an objective, universal and cognizable form of existence of material geographical formations and objects within the geospheric shell. More specifically, geographic space is understood as “the totality of relations between geo-objects located on a specific territory and developing in time” (E.B. Alaev, 1983). To put it even more simply, the kind of space that geography studies is terrestrial space (R.M. Downs, 1970). At the same time, one should not forget that geographical space is three-dimensional, and the territory, from the point of view of geometry, is only two-dimensional. (And according to Einstein, geometric space is curved, which requires modification of certain aspects of Euclidean geometry.)

The difference between territory and geographic space lies in the fact that the territory serves only as a general background for the location of material objects and, strictly speaking, is “empty” from the point of view of model constructions (although in practice, even in scientific literature-- the territory is often identified with the space, and this is not a big problem). All tangible objects and phenomena are constituent parts of geospace as a three-dimensional formation.

Its specific feature is associated with the simultaneous presence of the qualities of discontinuity and continuity. With its own physical space, each geographic feature performs certain functions in the formation of a geographical landscape (or field) and affects the surrounding geographical objects. It is in this that the "geography" of material objects and phenomena is manifested.

A broader interpretation of "geographical space" is given in the brochure by K.V. Pashkang. He believes that the geographical envelope closely connected with the outer space surrounding it and with the inner parts of the Earth. solar energy, coming from the Sun to the Earth, is the source of all geographical processes. The gravitational force of the Sun keeps the Earth in a circumsolar orbit, the gravitational force of the moon causes the formation of tides. Meteorites fall on the Earth's surface. Endogenous energy comes from the bowels of the Earth, which determines the formation of the largest forms of the earth's surface. The upper boundary of geographic space is located at an altitude of 10 degrees of the Earth, at the upper boundary of the magnetosphere; the lower one is on the Moho surface. Geographic space is divided into four parts.

1. Near space. The lower boundary runs along the upper boundary of the atmosphere at an altitude of 2000 km above the Earth. Here there is an interaction of cosmic factors with magnetic and gravitational fields. The corpuscular radiation of the Sun is delayed in the magnetosphere.
2. High atmosphere. From below, it is limited to the stratopause. This is where cosmic rays are slowed down, converted, and ozone is formed.
3. Geographic envelope.
4. Underlying bark. The lower boundary is the Moho surface. This is the area of manifestation of endogenous processes that form geotextures and morphostructures of the planet.