ABSTRACT
Geographers have fixated upon contextualized accounts of space as leaders in the broader spatial turn in the social sciences (Warf and Arias 2008). This change in approach has been enlivened by calls to link various and potentially contradictory approaches to social inquiry. In particular, geographers have shown interest in the connection between modern hegemonic approaches to social inquiry and critical (though modern) interpretations of hegemony, and what post-structural social investigation means to both. Barnes (2009) argued that there is no fundamental reason why quantitative methodologies cannot be applied to critical geography. The argument was simply that decidedly hegemonic modern scientific approaches can (and should) be applied with critical interpretations of the world in a conciliatory approach to social inquiry.
