Abstract
William Whewell’s stature among philosophers has slipped considerably since the late 1960s and early 1970s, when he was widely portrayed as providing an alternative to positivist philosophy of science. Partly as a result of shifting philosophical fashion and partly because the short-comings and idiosyncracies of the historicist approach have become clearer, philosophical interest in Whewell now tends to focus on his discussion of particular issues such as the role of consilience in theory choice rather than on his more general conception of scientific inquiry. Yet in redressing the balance we are in danger of losing sight of the gains that Whewell undoubtedly made. There remains much to be said for his contention that philosophy of science should be rooted in a close examination of actual scientific practice. And many of his specific insights concerning scientific discovery have still to be fully assimilated by philosophers of science.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to dedicate this paper to Robert Butts on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday. While preparing it I have been often reminded of how much Butts has done to alert us to the importance (and limitations) of Whewell’s philosophy of science, Hopefully some of what I have learned from studying his work is reflected in what follows.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
Aiton, E. J. (1969). “Kepler’s Second Law of Planetary Motion”, Isis, 60, pp. 75–90.
Buchdahl, G. (1971). “Inductivist Versus Deductivist Approaches in the Philosphy of Science as Illustrated by Some Controversies Between Whewell and Mill”, Monist, 55, pp 343–367.
Butts, R. E. (ed.). (1968). William Whewell’s Theory of Scientific Method, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Butts, R. E. (1973). “Whewell’s Logic of Induction”, In R. N. Giere and R. S. Westfall (eds.), Foundations of Scientific Method: The Nineteenth Century, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 53–85.
Ducfasse C. J. (1966). “William Whewell’s Philosophy of Scientific Discovery”, In E. Madden (ed.), Theories of Scientific Method, Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of Discovery, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koyré, A. (1973). The Astronomical Revolution, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Lugg, A. M. (1985). “The Process of Discovery”, Philosophy of Science, 52, pp. 207–220.
Mill, J. S. (1843/1973). A System of Logic, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Niiniluoto, I. (1977). “Notes on Popper as Follower of Whewell and Pierce”, Ajatus, 37, pp. 272–327.
Peirce, C. S. (1960). Collected Papers, C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss (eds.), Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Volume I.
Stoll, M. R. (1929). Whewell’s Philosophy of Induction, Lancaster: Lancaster Press.
Strong, E. W. (1955). “William Whewell and John Stuart Mill: Their Controversy about Scientific Knowledge”, Journal of the History of Ideas, 16, pp. 209–231.
Todhunter, I. (1876). William Whewell, D. D. An account of His Writings, London: Macmillan.
Venn, J. (1907/1972). The Principles of Empirical or Inductive Logic, Second Edition, London: Macmillan. Reprinted: Burt Franklin, New York.
von Wright, G. H. (1957). The Logical Problem of Induction, Second Edition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Whewell, W. (1834/1984). Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology, London: William Pickering.
Reprinted in part in Y. Elkana (ed.), W. Whewell, Selected Writings on the History of Science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Whewell, W. (1857/1967). The History of the Inductive Sciences, Third Edition, London: John W. Parker. Reprinted: Frank Cass, London.
Whewell, W. (1860/1971). On the Philosophy of Discovery, London: John W. Parker. Reprinted: Burt Franklin, New York.
Whewell, W. (1847/1967). The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Second Edition, London: John W. Parker. Reprinted: Johnson, New York.
Wilson, C. (1974). “Newton and some Philosophers on Kepler’s ‘Laws’”, Journal of the History of Ideas, 35, pp. 231–258.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lugg, A. (1989). History, Discovery and Induction: Whewell on Kepler on the Orbit of Mars. In: Brown, J.R., Mittelstrass, J. (eds) An Intimate Relation. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 116. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2327-0_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2327-0_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7546-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2327-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive