epistemology, ontology, and methodology, and does not have a distinctive theoretical identity. Nonetheless, Blomley (2006) identifies six common themes of critical geography, encompassing: A commitment to theory and a rejection of empiricism. Critical geographers consciously deploy theories of some form, but they draw from a variety of theoretical wells, such as political economy, governmentality, feminism, anti-racism, and anti-imperialism. A commitment to reveal the processes that produce inequalities. Critical geographers seek to unveil power, uncover inequality, expose resistance, and cultivate liberating politics and social changes. An emphasis on representation as a means of domination and resistance. A common focus of critical geography is to study how representations of space sustain power; or on the contrary, how representations of space can be used to challenge power. An optimistic faith in the power of critical scholarship. Critical geographers believe that scholarship can be used to resist dominant representations, and that scholars can undo said domination and help free the oppressed. There exists an implicit confidence in the power of critical scholarship to reach the uninformed, and in the capacities of people to defeat alienation by means of reflexive self-education. A commitment to progressive practices. Critical geographers want to make a difference through praxis. They claim to be united with social movements and activists with commitments to social justice. The actual relationship between critical geography and activism has been much debated. An understanding of space as a critical tool. Critical geographers pay special attention to how spatial arrangements and representations can be used to produce oppression and inequality. Critical geographers identify to varying degrees how space can be used as both a veil and tool of power. Critiques There are many criticisms of critical geography. Physical geographers and those who embraced the new techniques developed during the quantitative revolution, are often the target of criticisms from critical geographers. These geographers argue that critical geographers argue from a place of ignorance on quantitative geography. The popularity of critical geography, and the resulting decline in quantitative methods, is argued to be in large part due to the difficulty of the subject matter causing people to "jump ship." Further, some believe that critical geographers are antiscience. Many quantitative geographers acknowledge the early criticisms pointed out by critical geographers and contend that new technology and techniques have addressed these criticisms and that they no longer apply. There has also been relatively limited discussion over the shared commitments of