Uniformitarianism and analogy have long provided the conceptual scaffolding for interpreting the past landscapes, climates, and cultural processes, including that of Quaternary Period. However, debates exist on the uncritical acceptance of uniformitarianism. The assumption that present-day processes can reliably explain past dynamics faces critical challenges. Similarly, analogy, while methodologically indispensable, remains frequently critiqued for circular reasoning, reductionism, and uncritical generalisation. This session invites a re-examination of these frameworks across disciplines including archaeology, geology, geomorphology and other Quaternary palaeosciences. How have their uses evolved in light of new theoretical models, computational tools, and diverse knowledge systems? Contributors are encouraged to reflect on their field experiences, addressing both the utility and limitations of these approaches in practice. Emphasis will be placed on case studies that demonstrate innovative methodologies, reflexive theory-building, and productive tensions between past and present. By fostering critical dialogue across disciplines, this session aims to reassess the epistemological foundations of quaternary research, exploring how they can be reframed for a world shaped by environmental and cultural change, utilizing approaches of modern analogy and uniformitarianism.