The studies done by geomorphologists in the domain of environmental systems result in an understanding of theoretical frameworks which account for the structural and behavioral patterns of such systems, and whose codification and interpretation hold an irresistible fascination for researches. The analysis of the pattern in question, which sometimes enabled us to make contingent predications, calls for an unsophisticated style so that we can put across the concepts involved in the process.When designing a model, the point worth considering is that it is within a theoretical framework derived from our own impression of the exaternal world that we envaluate a given phenomenon. Although efforts have been made to judge the accuracy and efficiency of a model by its correspondence to experimental reality, yet we must not ignore the fact that many existing models are purly conceptual in nature n that they are not realizable in the outside world.It is customary for the majority if researchers to base their proposed models on analogues borrowed from field not directly related to the area of their investigation. For instance, when hydrologists try to analogize the flow of a river to that of electricity, they have used an already – defined reality, thus interpreting the behavior of water – the phenomenon understudy in terms of a model of electric current.This, of course, is a common procedure and no one can find fault with it. Nonetheless, what the present paper has set out to address is ratherthe epistomologcal frameworks which are involed in condifying models, and which provide us with varied and conflicting principles.In other words this paper is meant to answer this question: if epistemological frameworks undergo a change, what impact will this have on the designing of a model? put differently, what relationship can be said to hold between specific models and the geomorphological frameworks employed for the purpose?.The results obtained from this paper, which is founded on a research project conducted at isfahan University, show that we can, on the basis of theoretical views prevailing in geomorphology (such as the Divisian, the catastophistic and the systemic paradigms), come up with specific models and interpret each in unequivocal terms. In other words, the current situation in geomorphology is that models are primarily a function of the particular epistemological and theoretical stance adopted by a researcher in evaluating a phenomena, and only secondarily a means whereby facts are accounted for.
Keywords: Geoneuron, Feedback, Epystomology, Model, System, Equilibrium.
)