Physical Geography has evolved to become a highly productive mainstream natural science, delivering on the metrics required by the accounting systems dominating the neoliberal University. I argue that the result has been: (1) a crisis of over‐production (of more articles than we are capable of consuming); (2) a risk of under‐production (growing scarcity in our ability to produce the research questions needed to sustain our productivity); and (3) a “disciplinary fix” involving either pursuit of the problem‐solving implicit in the neoliberal impact agenda or creative destruction, aligning ourselves less with geography and more with the natural sciences. Using Isabelle Stengers' critique of 21st‐century science, I argue for a slowing down in Physical Geography, by changing how we relate to the subjects that we study. I use the ideas of William Bunge to discuss the notion of geographical expedition as a means of achieving slow science, even if “expedition” is a term to be used cautiously. I illustrate these points from one of my own projects to show how slow science may allow creation of those moments that might lead to a more creative and critical Physical Geography centred on the very curiosity that makes being a scientist so interesting.