History, Discovery and Induction: Whewell on Kepler on the Orbit of Mars

  • Andrew Lugg
Chapter
Part of the Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science book series (BSPS, volume 116)

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.

Keywords

Scientific Discovery Inductive Inference Elliptical Orbit Elliptical Motion Inductive Validity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Aiton, E. J. (1969). “Kepler’s Second Law of Planetary Motion”, Isis, 60, pp. 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.Google Scholar
  3. Butts, R. E. (ed.). (1968). William Whewell’s Theory of Scientific Method, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  4. 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.Google Scholar
  5. Ducfasse C. J. (1966). “William Whewell’s Philosophy of Scientific Discovery”, In E. Madden (ed.), Theories of Scientific Method, Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  6. Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of Discovery, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Koyré, A. (1973). The Astronomical Revolution, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Lugg, A. M. (1985). “The Process of Discovery”, Philosophy of Science, 52, pp. 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mill, J. S. (1843/1973). A System of Logic, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  10. Niiniluoto, I. (1977). “Notes on Popper as Follower of Whewell and Pierce”, Ajatus, 37, pp. 272–327.Google Scholar
  11. Peirce, C. S. (1960). Collected Papers, C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss (eds.), Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Volume I.Google Scholar
  12. Stoll, M. R. (1929). Whewell’s Philosophy of Induction, Lancaster: Lancaster Press.Google Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Todhunter, I. (1876). William Whewell, D. D. An account of His Writings, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Venn, J. (1907/1972). The Principles of Empirical or Inductive Logic, Second Edition, London: Macmillan. Reprinted: Burt Franklin, New York.Google Scholar
  16. von Wright, G. H. (1957). The Logical Problem of Induction, Second Edition, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Whewell, W. (1834/1984). Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology, London: William Pickering.Google Scholar
  18. Reprinted in part in Y. Elkana (ed.), W. Whewell, Selected Writings on the History of Science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  19. Whewell, W. (1857/1967). The History of the Inductive Sciences, Third Edition, London: John W. Parker. Reprinted: Frank Cass, London.Google Scholar
  20. Whewell, W. (1860/1971). On the Philosophy of Discovery, London: John W. Parker. Reprinted: Burt Franklin, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Whewell, W. (1847/1967). The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Second Edition, London: John W. Parker. Reprinted: Johnson, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Wilson, C. (1974). “Newton and some Philosophers on Kepler’s ‘Laws’”, Journal of the History of Ideas, 35, pp. 231–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Lugg
    • 1
  1. 1.University of OttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations