Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Philosophy of the Social Sciences
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0048393109336180v1
39/3/495    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Curtis, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reviews

Review Essays: Whewell’s Philosophy under Dispute

Ron Curtis

Sydenham University, Ontario, Canada

William Whewell tried to explain how scientific knowledge of necessary and certain truth was possible by tracing it to ideas that arose not out of experience but had an independent origin in the mind. Although Whewell has generally been regarded as an a priorist in some sense and as a proponent of hypothetico-deductivism, Snyder tries to show that he can be assimilated to the twentieth-century inductivist mainstream. She fails to make her case, however, in part because she fails to pay sufficient attention to Whewell’s insistence that scientific discovery is beyond the reach of method and always involves happy guesses.

Key Words: scientific discovery • induction • hypothetico-deductivism • conjectures • hypotheses • guesses • Kepler’s astronomy • Popper • Whewell • Mill

This version was published on September 1, 2009

Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Vol. 39, No. 3, 495-506 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0048393109336180
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?