On the distinction between classical and nonclassical geographies: Some critical remarks

In Ontological Tools for Geographic Representation, Roberto Casati, Barry Smith, and Achille Varzi have formalized and introduced the (geo-ontological) distinction between classical and nonclassical geographies. Although that distinction makes no essential reference to maps, the authors have pointed out that the dichotomy can be useful to specify the kind of geography that is implied in the spatial representation. Thus, the aim of this paper is to showcase the main assumptions behind the distinction between classical and nonclassical geography and to present some possible issues arising from its application to cartographic representation. Accordingly, the first two sections offer a short introduction to the scopes of the ontology of geography, and to the main theoretical tools needed for advancing a (formal) theory of spatial representation. The third section shows some issues emerging from the application of the distinction between classical and nonclassical geographies to the cartographic representation, by discussing (and expanding) the list of examples provided by the three authors.