History and scientific practice in the construction of an adequate philosophy of science: revisiting a Whewell/Mill debate

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (1):85-93 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

William Whewell raised a series of objections concerning John Stuart Mill’s philosophy of science which suggested that Mill’s views were not properly informed by the history of science or by adequate reflection on scientific practices. The aim of this paper is to revisit and evaluate this incisive Whewellian criticism of Mill’s views by assessing Mill’s account of Michael Faraday’s discovery of electrical induction. The historical evidence demonstrates that Mill’s reconstruction is an inadequate reconstruction of this historical episode and the scientific practices Faraday employed. But a study of Faraday’s research also raises some questions about Whewell’s characterization of this discovery. Thus, this example provides an opportunity to reconsider the debate between Whewell and Mill concerning the role of the sciences in the development of an adequate philosophy of scientific methodology.Keywords: Inductivism; Experiment; Theory; Methodology; Electromagnetism.

Similar books and articles

Whewell and mill on induction.Harold T. Walsh - 1962 - Philosophy of Science 29 (3):279-284.
John Stuart mill on induction and hypotheses.Struan Jacobs - 1991 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 29 (1):69-83.
Whewell’s tidal researches: scientific practice and philosophical methodology.Steffen Ducheyne - 2010 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (1):26-40.
Mill's System of Logic.David Godden - 2014 - In W. J. Mander (ed.), Oxford handbook of British philosophy in the nineteenth century. Oxford University Press. pp. 44-70.
The debate between Whewell and Mill on the nature of scientific induction.Malcolm Forster - 2004 - In Dov M. Gabbay, John Woods & Akihiro Kanamori (eds.), Handbook of the History of Logic. Elsevier. pp. 10--93.
John Stuart Mill on the Relation between Morality and Science.Huang Lan - 2002 - Philosophy and Culture 29 (12):1143-1153.
William Whewell and John Stuart Mill on the Methodology of Political Economy.Samuel Hollander - 1983 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 14 (2):127.
Inference to the best explanation: Or, who won the Mill-Whewell debate?Peter Achinstein - 1992 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 23 (2):349-364.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-05-22

Downloads
1,325 (#8,218)

6 months
141 (#21,653)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Aaron D. Cobb
Auburn University At Montgomery

Citations of this work

Unwarranted assumptions: Claude Bernard and the growth of the vera causa standard.Raphael Scholl - 2020 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 82 (C):120-130.
Whewell on the classification of the sciences.Raphaël Sandoz - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 60:48-54.
Framing the Epistemic Schism of Statistical Mechanics.Javier Anta - 2021 - Proceedings of the X Conference of the Spanish Society of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science.
William Whewell’s Semantic Account of Induction.Corey Dethier - 2018 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 8 (1):141-156.
Galilean argumentation and the inauthenticity of the Cigoli letter on painting vs. sculpture.Maurice A. Finocchiaro - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (4):492-508.

Add more citations