Darwin as an epistemologist

References

• Darwin , C. 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. 2 , No. 2–5 ‘Addenda and Corrigenda’, edited by de Beer and M. J. Rowlands, ibid., 2, no. 6 (1961); ‘Pages Excised by Darwin’, edited by de Beer, Rolands, and B. M. Skramovsky, ibid., 3, no. 5 (1967). In all citations, Darwin's pagination and de Beer's parts are given. Darwin's original designations of B, C, D and E notebooks are labelled by de Beer Part I (July 1837 to February 1838), Part II (February to July 1838), Part III (July to October 1838), Part IV (October 1838 to July 1839), respectively.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1959 . “ Darwin's Journal ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. 2 , 7 – 7 . No. 1
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1958 . The Autobiography of Charles Darwin Edited by: Barlow , N. 118 – 118 . London edited with Appendix and Notes by
   Google Scholar
• Darwin and Wallace . April 1859 . More Letters of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin , F. and Seward , A.C. Vol. I , April , 118 – 119 . New York 6 2 vols 1903
   Google Scholar
• For a detailed account of his biogeographical problems, which reveals their Lyellian background, see Hodge M.J.S. Darwin and the Laws of the Animate Part of the Terrestrial System (1835–37): On the Lyellian Origins of His Zoonomical Explanatory Programme Studies in History of Biology 1983 6 1 106
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. I , 12 – 14 . For a thorough discussion of Darwin's developing view of the mechanisms of transmutation in his notebooks see D. Kohn, ‘Theories to Work By: Rejected Theories, Reproduction and Darwin's Path to Natural Selection’, Studies in History of Biology, 4 (1980), 67–170.
   Google Scholar
• Cannon , W.F. 1976 . The Whewell-Darwin Controversy . Journal of the Geological Society of London , 132 : 377 – 384 .
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin 6 – 45 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber 69–100. In all citations Darwin's pagination is given. Looking over these notebooks almost twenty years later Darwin wrote on the inside front cover of M: ‘This Book full of Metaphysics on Morals and Speculations on Expression’.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. M , 61 – 61 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 11 – 11 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 13 – 13 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 4 – 4 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber 14
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. M , 128 – 128 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1958 . The Autobiography of Charles Darwin Edited by: Barlow , N. 84 – 84 . London edited with Appendix and Notes by
   Google Scholar
• C. Darwin, ‘Old and Useless Notes’ in Darwin ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Chicago 1980 122 153 transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1838 . Address to the Geological Society, delivered at the Anniversary on the 16th of February, 1838 . Proceedings of the Geological Society of London , 2 : 624 – 649 .
   Google Scholar
• 1836–1837 . Darwin was elected a Fellow of the Society in November 1836 . Proceedings of the Geological Society of London , 2 ( 48 ) The January paper, ‘Observations of Proofs of Recent Elevation on the Coast of Chili’, was reported in Proceedings of the Geological Society of London, 2 (1838), 446–9. In May 1837 he read ‘A Sketch of the Deposits Containing Extinct Mammalia in the Neighbourhood of the Plata’, Proceedings of the Geological Society of London, 2 (1838), 542–4; followed by ‘On Certain Areas of Elevation and Subsidence in the Pacific and Indian Oceans, as Deduced from the Study of Coral Formations’, Proceedings of the Geological Society of London, 2 (1838), 552–4. And in November 1837 he read ‘On the Formation of Mould’, Transactions of the Geological Society of London, second series, part 3, 5 (1840), 505–9. These are reprinted in The Collected Papers of Charles Darwin, edited by P. H. Barrett, 2 vols (Chicago, 1977), I, 41–53. Whewell was very impressed with Darwin's reports to the Society, with the ‘great mass’ of the results of the Beagle voyage which Darwin had ‘been kind enough to place in [Whewell's] hands’. His work had ‘a clearness and force which…filled us all with admiration’. (Whewell (footnote 16), 643–4). As a result, Whewell proposed Darwin for a Secretaryship of the Society, a position he accepted reluctantly after much arm-twisting. See Darwin to Henslow, 14 October 1837, in C. Darwin, Life and Letters, edited by F. Darwin, 2 vols (New York 1887), I, 256–8. For a useful discussion of Darwin's time at the centre of the Geological Society see M. J. S. Rudwick, ‘Charles Darwin in London: The Integration of Public and Private Science’, Isis, 73 (1982), 173–82.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1838 . Address to the Geological Society, delivered at the Anniversary on the 16th of February, 1838 . Proceedings of the Geological Society of London , 2 : 641 – 641 . The fossils had been discovered at Sanson in France and in the Sewalik Hills of India. For a report of the Indian find see Proceedings of the Geological Society of London, 2, no. 51 (1837), 545, 568. Darwin first noticed these reports in his first transmutation notebook where he refers to ‘great monkeys’ (Darwin (footnote 1), 126 E). He returns to another report, which includes a discussion of the French find, a few pages later (p. 133). At this point (late 1837) he is interested in the two discoveries as an exception to a law regulating fossil distribution—the law of succession of types. When he returns again to the finds at the end of the first notebook (250 E) they are for him once again anomalies of biogeography, fossil distribution.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1838 . Address to the Geological Society, delivered at the Anniversary on the 16th of February, 1838 . Proceedings of the Geological Society of London , 2 : 642 – 642 . Cannon gives an interesting account of the problems Whewell posed for Darwin, but underestimates the significance of human reason in Whewell's anti-transmutationist arguments. See Cannon (footnote 7), 380.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. I , 55 – 55 .
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1830 . Review of Lyell's Principles of Geology . Quarterly Review , 43 : 411 – 469 . (p. 467). Whewell saw human origins as a serious problem for uniformitarians, such as Lyell, as well as for transmutationists. Like the transmutationists, Lyell had made the mistake of ‘separating the moral from the physical agency of mankind and eliminating the former as irrelevant to the subject’. Against Lyell, who opposed progressivism, he argued that human origins exhibited the ‘progressive march of creation’ (p. 467).
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 153 – 153 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Barrett , P.H. 1980 . “ ‘Preface’ to C. Darwin, ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin xv – xxiv . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber (p. xix)
   Google Scholar
• Darwin was reading Whewell's Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology London 1837 and Whewell's History of the Inductive Sciences, 3 vols (London, 1837), as his notebooks show. See Darwin (footnote 1), II, 72 E, 91 E, 268; IV, 69; Darwin (footnote 8), N 14. See also his letter offering to lend Charles Babbage his copy of Whewell's History in G. de Beer, ‘Further Unpublished Letters of Charles Darwin’, Annals of Science, 14 (1958), 82–114 (p. 84). (This letter is dated to 1837 in A Calendar of the Correspondence of Charles Darwin, 1821–1882, edited by F. Burkhardt et al. (New York, 1985).) See also Cannon's estimate of Darwin's reading times in Cannon (footnote 7), 378, 380 and in S. F. Cannon, Science in Culture (New York, 1978), 89–90.
   Google Scholar
• Agassi , J. 1975 . “ Arguments from the existence of science are transcendental arguments ” . In Science in Flux 311 – 311 . Dordrecht For a discussion of the theological context of Whewell's epistemology and that of his contemporaries, see Richard Yeo, ‘William Whewell, Natural Theology and the Philosophy of Science in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Britain’, Annals of Science, 36 (1979), 493–516.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. I , 360 – 365 . London 2 vols (p. 363)
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. 2 , 362 – 362 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. 2 , 363 – 363 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. 2 , 363 – 363 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. 2 , 363 – 363 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. 2 , 365 – 365 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 328 – 328 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 334 – 334 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell's argument is directed against empiricists such as J. F. W. Herschel who argued that the laws of science are summary statements or simple generalizations, of particular observations. See Herschel J.F.W. Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy London 1831 Chapter 6. For a critical review of Herschel's book, see J. Agassi, ‘Sir John Herschel's Philosophy of Success’ in his Science and Society (Dordrecht, 1981), pp. 388–420.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 305 – 305 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 307 – 307 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. 2 , 363 – 363 . London Whewell's Astronomy and General Physics was first published in 1833 and four other editions had been issued by 1837. ‘There is…no variation of any importance in the successive editions’ (Todhunter (footnote 26), I, 67).
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 256 – 256 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to natural Theology 256 – 257 . London
   Google Scholar
• Herschel , J.F.W. 1841 . Review of the History and Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences by the Reverend William Whewell . Quarterly Review , 68 : 177 – 238 . (p. 209)
   Google Scholar
• Butts , R.E. 1965 . Necessary Truth in Whewell's Theory of Science . American Philosophical Quarterly , 2 : 161 – 181 . (p. 175). Butts's chronology is accepted by Yeo (footnote 29), 505–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butts . 1965 . Necessary Truth in Whewell's Theory of Science . American Philosophical Quarterly , 2 : 175 – 176 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1853 . Of the Plurality of Worlds: an Essay London
   Google Scholar
• Quoted in Butts Butts R.E. Necessary Truth in Whewell's Theory of Science American Philosophical Quarterly 1965 2 179 179 This passage is reproduced in Todhunter (footnote 26), I, 207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• We see it again in 1860: ‘Our Ideas correspond to the facts of the world…because our Ideas are given us by the same power which made the world and given so…these can and must agree with the world so made’. Whewell W. Philosophy of Discovery London 1860 358 358 Some commentators may have been misled on this point by Whewell's essentialistic determination not to mix subject matters in his various publications. He discusses the theological justification in detail only in works which are ‘in essence’ theological. Thus in 1825 the justification comes in an essay titled ‘Reflexions on God’ (footnote 26). In 1833 it appears in his treatise on natural theology (footnote 24). And natural theology is his subject again in the Plurality of Worlds. There, ‘the relation of Man and God…was…my subject from the beginning’ (Whewell to Sir James Stephen, 4 November 1853, in Todhunter (footnote 26), II, 393). The theological justification is not discussed at length in Whewell's Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, 2 vols (London, 1840); all citations refer to the second edition of 1847 and this is perhaps why Butts thinks it occurred to Whewell only later. But the philosophy of the sciences is, in Whewell's view, ‘a science resembling other sciences’ (see footnote 57, below) and this means that in the Philosophy when he finds himself ‘on the borders of inquiries of a theological nature’ he must be careful not to ‘transgress the boundaries of our subject, as…predetermined by the Fundamental Ideas’ (II, 115). One must not mix science with theology. He does however allude to his theological justification at the end of the first volume when he refers to Ideas as ‘stones of the lofty temple of truth…intended by the Great Architect’ (708). In the end, however, Whewell does feel compelled to violate his own precepts in the Philosophy of Discovery, as we have seen. He says that although he has ‘hitherto abstained from discussing religious doctrines’ in works on the philosophy of sciences ‘such a reserve carried too far must deprive our philosophy of completeness’ (354).
   Google Scholar
• Herschel . 1841 . Review of the History and Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences by the Reverend William Whewell . Quarterly Review , 68 : 182 – 182 . In view of this I cannot accept Butts's claim that Herschel read a full-blown conventionalism into Whewell's Philosophy. But I shall not pursue this further here.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 9 – 9 . London 3 vols As he put it in The Mechanical Euclid, also of 1837: In scientific discovery ‘there is some general idea … given not by the phenomena but by the mind’. ‘Remarks On Mathematical Reasoning and On the Logic of Induction’ from the Mechanical Euclid, reprinted in Whewell (footnote 45, Philosophy) ii, 595–623 (pp. 616–7).
   Google Scholar
• The term ‘Fundamental Ideas’ does not appear in Whewell's Astronomy and General Physics. But already in 1832 he was speaking of ‘conceptions which must exist in the mind in order to get by induction a law from a collection of facts’ (Whewell to Jones, 19 February 1832, in Todhunter (footnote 26), ii, 141). By 1834 we have quite a full account of the Ideas: ‘What I called Ideas … are certain mental bonds of connexion’ which must be applied to ‘impressions of sense … in order to arrive at knowledge’ (Whewell to Jones, 21 August 1834, in Todhunter (footnote 26), ii, 186). Though they originate in the mind, Fundamental Ideas are not innate: they must be developed, rendered clear and distinct by a process of trial and error in experience. See Whewell (footnote 45, Philosophy), i, 44. For a thorough discussion of the Ideas, see C. J. Ducasse, ‘William Whewell's Theory of Scientific Discovery’, in Theories of Scientific Method Blake R.M. Ducasse C.J. Madden E.H. Seattle 1960 213 234
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . “ Experience can tell us only what … is or has been, not what must be ” . In Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 198 – 198 . London David Brewster located Whewell's philosophy in the empiricist-rationalist debate in his ‘Review of Whewell's History of the Inductive Sciences’, Edinburgh Review, 67, No. 133 (1838), 110–50; and contrasted it with that of Comte in a later review of the ‘Cours de Philosophie Positive’, Edinburgh Review, 67, No. 136 (1838), 271–307 (p. 274). According to Barrett (footnote 8, p. 203n), Darwin was reading the latter review around September 1838.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 6 – 6 . London 3 vols A list of thirty Ideas is given in the Philosophy (footnote 45), ii, 117.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 29 – 29 . London Whewell warns against Locke's mistake of assuming the ‘separation of the mind itself from ideal objects about which it is employed in thinking’.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 61 – 61 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 290 – 290 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 290 – 290 . London
   Google Scholar
• His subject was, as he said, proposed to him and limited to the progress of the physical sciences. Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology London 1837 vi
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 708 – 708 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. II , 118 – 118 . London Also as in other sciences, the ideas of the philosophy of science ‘have been … developed into clearness and certainty by successive attempts’ (ibid.).
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 326 – 326 . London see also Whewell (footnote 24, History), i, 9–10.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology Vol. III , 477 – 477 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology Vol. III , 480 – 480 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 357 – 357 . London Whewell is not simply talking here, as has been suggested to me, of events which fall within our direct observation as being law-governed. (His text says: we perceive that events in the material world are law-governed. It does not say: events that we perceive, and only those are law-governed.) And he goes on to say that the ‘laws of material nature … operate at all times and in all places; affect every province of the universe and involve every relation of its parts’ (360); that is, those we see and those we do not.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 367 – 367 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 373 – 373 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 373 – 373 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 374 – 374 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 373 – 373 . London
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1980 . “ Essay on Theology and Natural Selection ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 154 – 162 . Chicago in transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber (p. 3). Hodge concludes these notes were ‘almost certainly’ written in March 1839. See M. J. S. Hodge and David Kohn, ‘The Immediate Origins of Natural Selection’, in The Darwinian Heritage, edited by D. Kohn (Princeton, 1985), 185–206 (p. 200).
   Google Scholar
• This view can be traced to T. H. Huxley. See Huxley T. On the Reception of the Origin of Species The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin Darwin F. New York 1887 I 533 558 2 vols (pp. 543–4). A recent advocate is H. Gruber, Darwin on Man (New York, 1974), pp. 126–33. For a thorough criticism see E. Mayr, The Growth of Biological Thought (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 375–87.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 489 – 489 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Lyell , C. 1830–1833 . Principles of Geology Vol. II , 24 – 24 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Lyell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Teology Vol. II , 124 – 124 . London For a detailed discussion of Lyell's hypothesis and the problems it was intended to solve see Hodge (footnote 5), 6–12; 28–35.
   Google Scholar
• His criticisms began in 1830 Whewell Review of Lyell's Principles of Geology Quarterly Review 1830 43 and continued in W. Whewell, ‘Review of Lyell's Principles of Geology II’, Quarterly Review, 45 (1832), 103–32; W. Whewell, ‘Review of Lyell's Principles of Geology, I–IV’, Quarterly Review, 53 (1835), 406–48.
   Google Scholar
• See for example Whewell Address to the Geological Society, delivered at the Anniversary on the 16th of February, 1838 Proceedings of the Geological Society of London 1838 2 644 645
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 485 – 485 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 489 – 489 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 487 – 487 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 2 – 3 . London Whewell had said in 1832, in his review of Lyell's second volume, that we should be seeking the natural causes which had divided the surface of the globe into ‘distinct provinces … of animal and vegetable families’. These were then ‘unknown and obscure’ but they ‘must certainly exist’. Whewell (footnote 73), 130.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 486 – 486 . London 3 vols For an elaboration see Whewell (footnote 45, Philosophy), i, 681–93. According to Whewell theological records cannot confirm firm geological theories, nor can geology contradict providential history (ibid.). In this, he resembles Duhem who later argued that the physicist should not ‘invade the territory of metaphysics or … religious dogma’ and that ‘logic does not confer on physical theory any power to confirm or invalidate a … cosmological system’ (P. Duhem, The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory (New York, 1954), p. 291).
   Google Scholar
• Lyell . 1830–1833 . Principles of Geology Vol. II , 375 – 387 . London 3 vols 124
   Google Scholar
• Hume , D. 1969 . Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Edited by: Aiken , H.E. 23 – 23 . London
   Google Scholar
• Hume , D. 1969 . Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Edited by: Aiken , H.E. 23 – 23 . London
   Google Scholar
• See, for example Macculloch J. Proofs and Illustrations of the Attributes of God London 1837 3 This book was criticized by Darwin for its use of divine interpositions rather than secondary laws. Darwin (footnote 68).
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 343 – 343 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 343 – 343 . London
   Google Scholar
• See Hume D. A Treatise of Human Nature Selby-Bigge L.A. Oxford 1888 65 65 ‘But if you cannot point out any … impression’ from which your idea is derived ‘you may be certain you are mistaken when you imagine you have any such idea’.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 343 – 343 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 706 – 706 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 352 – 352 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 356 – 356 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 356 – 356 . London (footnote 45, Philosophy), I, 708
   Google Scholar
• Whewell elaborated on his criticism of Lyell in the second edition of the History and said that it was his use of the idea of design in inductive science which had led him to criticize Lyell: ‘He supposed the agents who do this [distribute organisms] before they import species into particular localities to study the physical conditions of each spot and to use various precautions. It is on account of the notion of design thus introduced that I have described this opinion as a tenet of Natural Theology, rather than of Physical Philosophy’. Whewell History of the Inductive Sciences London 1837 III 490 490 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Ruse , M. 1977 . “ Whewell and the Argument from Design ” . In The Monist 244 – 261 . (p. 259)
   Google Scholar
• Huxley . 1887 . “ On the Reception of the Origin of Species ” . In The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin , F. Vol. I , 548 – 548 . New York 2 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 478 – 478 . London 3 vols See also p. 483
   Google Scholar
• We find an indisputable preponderance to that decision which rejects transmutation Whewell History of the Inductive Sciences London 1837 III 478 478 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 489 – 489 . London 3 vols My italics
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 2 – 3 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 483 – 484 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 380 – 380 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 372 – 372 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 483 – 483 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 483 – 483 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1842 . Address to the Geological Society of London, February 1839 . Proceedings of the Geological Society of London , 3 : 61 – 98 . (p. 96). My italics
   Google Scholar
• In order to capture what I take to be the spirit of Whewell's reservations, which owe nothing to theological dogmatism, let me mention the somewhat analogous reservations of a twentieth-century scientist, F. A. von Hayek, who argues that it must be impossible for us to explain the functioning of the human brain in any detail since ‘any apparatus … must possess a structure of a higher degree of complexity than is possessed by the object’ it is trying to explain The Sensory Order von Hayek F.A. London 1952 185 185
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 658 – 658 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 657 – 657 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 657 – 657 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 658 – 658 . London My italics
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. 2 , 92 – 92 . No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 477 – 477 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1958 . “ Charles Darwin's Sketch of 1842 ” . In Evolution by Natural Selection Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . 41 – 92 . Cambridge in (p. 59)
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 3 – 3 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology 352 – 352 . London
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Essay on Theology and Natural Selection ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 5 – 5 . Chicago in transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Ruse . 1977 . “ Whewell and the Argument from Design ” . In The Monist 258 – 258 .
   Google Scholar
• Cf. Agassi J. Continuity and Discontinuity in the History of Science Science in Flux Agassi Dordrecht 1975 283 299 in For a criticism of radicalist theories of the Darwinian revolution see Hodge (footnote 5), 92–8.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. M , 154c – 154c . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• See text to Whewell Bridgewater Treatise, Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology London 1837 357 357 Whewell is not simply talking here, as has been suggested to me, of events which fall within our direct observation as being law-governed. (His text says: we perceive that events in the material world are law-governed. It does not say: events that we perceive, and only those are law-governed.) And he goes on to say that the ‘laws of material nature … operate at all times and in all places; affect every province of the universe and involve every relation of its parts’ (360); that is, those we see and those we do not.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1958 . “ Charles Darwin's Sketch of 1842 ” . In Evolution by Natural Selection Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . 86 – 86 . Cambridge in A similar statement is in the Essay of 1844 (footnote 112, 253) and the Origin (488).
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 36 – 36 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 58 – 58 . 2 vols No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. III , 21 – 21 . 2 vols, No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 222E – 222E . 2 vols, No. 2–5 More than thirty years later Darwin made a similar point in a passage which echoes Whewell's statement in his Address of 1839 (footnote 104): ‘In what manner the mental powers were first developed in the lowest organisms is as hopeless an inquiry as how life itself first originated…. These problems are for the distant future if they are ever to be solved by man’. C. Darwin, Descent of Man (New York, 1902), p. 95.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 122 – 122 . 2 vols, No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 157 – 157 . 2 vols, No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 14 – 14 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber ‘Principles’ is used by Whewell as a synonym for ‘Ideas’ in this part of the History (I, book 4, chapter 5). Whewell has a similar discussion of the acquaintaince with the principles of geometry and mechanics which even ‘brute animals possess’ in his Philosophy (II, book 11, chapter 8). Here also, ‘principles’ is a synonym for ‘Ideas’. For example: ‘Those who have added to our knowledge in every age have referred to principles which the mind itself supplies’ (I, 28).
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 254 – 254 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 254 – 254 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. II , 111 – 111 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 253 – 253 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. II , 111 – 111 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. II , 109 – 109 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 253 – 253 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. II , 111 – 111 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. II , 110 – 110 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 253 – 253 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 196 – 196 . 2 vols, No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 11 – 11 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 11 – 11 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber We ourselves ‘acquire many notions unconsciously without abstracting them and reasoning on them’ (N, 27). Darwin's Whewellian terminology is, incidentally, precisely correct for ‘notions’ is another term Whewell uses for ‘principles’ (of mechanics, for example) as relied upon in practical action. See ‘Distinction of Common Notions and Scientific Ideas’, in Whewell (footnote 24, History), I, 12–4. Whewell distinguishes carefully among all three terms in Whewell (footnote 45, Philosophy), I, 29: ‘Ideas are not synonymous with Notions, they are Principles which give to our Notions whatever they contain of truth’.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 11 – 11 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 119 – 120 . London
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 14 – 14 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. I , 214 – 214 . 2 vols, No. 2–5 and II, 222E
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. N , 12 – 13 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 186 – 186 . London and 166
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Old and Useless Notes ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 41 – 41 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 186 – 186 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 187 – 187 . London
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Old and Useless Notes ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 40 – 40 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 191 – 191 . London
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . 96 – 96 . 2 vols, No. 2–5 My italics. In Whewell the Fundamental Ideas are forms of intuition. See, for example (footnote 45, Philosophy) I, 89.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. M , 131e – 131e . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. M , 141 – 141 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 13 – 13 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Cf. Darwin Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series de Beer Gavin 1960 II 198 198 2 vols, No. 2–5 ‘Reason and instinct … these faculties being viewed as replacing each other’.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 77 – 78 . 2 vols, No. 2–5 See also Darwin (footnote 15), 37. Darwin eventually saw a selective advantage here for ‘excess reasoning powers in place of specific instincts provided enlarged powers to meet with contingency’ (Darwin (footnote 1), III, 118).
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 66 – 66 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 479 – 480 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. I , 21 – 21 . 2 vols, No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. I , 216 – 216 . 2 vols, No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 42 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber For a detailed discussion of Darwin's changing view, in his notebooks, of the mechanisms of evolution see D. Kohn (footnote 6). Kohn argues that Darwin was at times much closer to Lamarck with his doctrine of use and disuse than he realized (128–33). There is a problem-oriented history of Darwin's changing view of the mechanism of instinct evolution from 1838 to 1860 in R.J. Richards, ‘Instinct and Intelligence in British Natural Theology’, Journal for the History of Biology, 14 (1981), 193–230.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 46 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 199 – 199 . 2 vols, No. 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 77 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 16 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 191 – 191 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. III , 382 – 382 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. II , 72 E – 72 E . 2 vols, No. 2–5 and 91 E
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1958 . The Autobiography of Charles Darwin Edited by: Barlow , N. 118 – 119 . London edited with Appendix and Notes by
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1960 . “ Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species ” . In Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series Edited by: de Beer , Gavin . Vol. IV , 63 – 63 . 2 vols, 2–5 Darwin later said that after he had partially acquired the ‘intellectual faculties which distinguish him from the lower animals, man would have been little liable to bodily modifications through natural selection’. It is the intellect which would advance through natural selection. Darwin (footnote 122), 172–3.
   Google Scholar
• As he said in the autumn of 1838, ‘Three principles will account for all: (1) Grandchildren like grandfathers (2) Tendency to small change (3) Great fertility in proportion to support of parents’ Darwin Darwin's Notebooks on Transmutation of Species Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series de Beer Gavin 1960 IV 58 58 2 vols, No. 2–5 (3) leads to the ‘deadly struggle’ and thus selection of the ‘best fitted’.
   Google Scholar
• Popper , K.R. 1963 . Conjectures and Refutations 95 – 95 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 6 – 6 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. 1 , 7 – 7 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. II , 138 – 138 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. II , 139 – 139 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 136 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 61 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber In the Descent of Man he was more emphatic: ‘variability of mental faculties in men of the same race, not to mention greater differences between men of distinct races is … notorious’. Darwin (footnote 122), 47.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 27 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. 1 , 113 – 113 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 113 – 113 . London and 616
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 157 – 157 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 617 – 617 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 617 – 617 . London John Watkins quotes a similar example from Konrad Lorenz: ‘a young swift proves perfectly able on the very moment it leaves the nest cavity to assess distances …. It can…recognize and catch prey’ (K. Lorenz, Evolution and the Modification of Behaviour (Chicago, 1965), 25–6). This suggests to Watkins ‘that … some animals are endowed with … information not derived from their experience’. (J. W. N. Watkins, Science and Scepticism (London, 1984), p. 22.) For evolutionists, a key word here is, of course, ‘their’. For a discussion of the historical background to Lorenz's theory see, R. J. Richards ‘The Innate and the Learned: the Evolution of Konrad Lorenz's Theory of Instinct’, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 4 (1974), 111–33.
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 617 – 617 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. I , 618 – 618 . London
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 4 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber ‘W.’ has been identified by Barrett as T. Worsley, Master of Downing College, Cambridge and a member of the Athenaeum. Worsley was at this time in close contact with Whewell (see Todhunter (footnote 26), I, 120) who was also frequently at the Athenaeum, as was Darwin. Darwin and Whewell may have had this example from the same source.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 4–5 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ ‘M Notebook’ and ‘N Notebook’ ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Vol. 11 , Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Old and Useless Notes ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 37 – 37 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Essay on Theology and Natural Selection ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 10 – 10 . Chicago in transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber On the later development of Darwin's theory of instinct by Romanes and Morgan, see R. J. Richards, ‘Lloyd Morgan's Theory of Instinct: From Darwinism to Neo-Darwinism’, Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 13 (1977), 12–32.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Essay on Theology and Natural Selection ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 11 – 11 . Chicago in transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Essay on Theology and Natural Selection ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 10 – 10 . Chicago in transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber As Whewell put it: ‘man can contemplate the ideal relations on which…his action depends’. (Whewell (footnote 45, Philosophy), I, 617; (footnote 24, History), I, 13.)
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1837 . History of the Inductive Sciences Vol. I , 319 – 319 . London 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Essay on Theology and Natural Selection ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: Early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 11 – 11 . Chicago in transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber
   Google Scholar
• See Whewell Address to the Geological Society, delivered at the Anniversary on the 16th of February, 1838 Proceedings of the Geological Society of London 1838 2 96 96
   Google Scholar
• Whewell , W. 1831 . Review of J. F. W. Herschel, Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy . Quarterly Review , 45 : 374 – 407 .
   Google Scholar
• Herschel , J.F.W. 1966 . Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy 76 – 76 . London
   Google Scholar
• Whewell to Quetelet, 28 June 1840, in Todhunter William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings London 1876 II 283 283 2 vols
   Google Scholar
• Whewell . 1860 . Philosophy of Discovery Vol. II , 667 – 667 . London
   Google Scholar
• 1840 . Review of Seven Works of Coleridge . London and Westminster Review , 33 : 257 – 302 . (p. 264)
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1980 . “ Old and Useless Notes ” . In Metaphysics, Materialism and the Evolution of Mind: early Writings of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin . 33 – 33 . Chicago transcribed and annotated by P. H. Barrett with a commentary by H. E. Gruber Darwin says ‘almost’ here because for him and Whewell, as we have seen, instincts are not the same as Ideas: they are near-Ideas, almost Ideas. Darwin was thinking along the same lines earlier when he said ‘Plato … says our … ideas arise from the pre-existence of the soul … read monkey for pre-existence’ (Darwin (footnote 8), M, 128).
   Google Scholar
• 1840 . Westiminter Review , 33 : 264 – 266 . Whewell's Philosophy was intended as a ‘criticism of the fallacies of the ultra-Lockean school’. (Whewell (footnote 45, Philosophy, I, Dedication.)
   Google Scholar
• Todhunter . 1876 . “ Reflexions of God ” . In William Whewell, D. D., An account of his writings Edited by: Todhunter , I. Vol. I , 143 – 143 . London 2 vols
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . 1958 . The Autobiography of Charles Darwin Edited by: Barlow , N. 118 – 119 . London edited with Appendix nd Notes by (footnote 68), 11. For a discussion of the theories of perfect adaptation among biologists in the 1830s, see D. Ospovat, The Development of Darwin's Theory (Cambridge, 1981), 33–8.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin , C. 1859 . On the Origin of Species 202 – 202 . London
   Google Scholar
• For an account of Darwin's changing views on adaptation, see Ospovat The Development of Darwin's Theory Cambridge 1981 205 209
   Google Scholar
• Whewell thought that when a theory has great explanatory and predictive power, it ‘bears marks of truth which could hardly be fallacious’ Whewell History of the Inductive Sciences London 1837 II 355 355 3 vols This was the theory of confirmation on the basis of which Darwin argued that his theory could not possibly be false. See for example, C. Darwin to Asa Gray, 11 November 1859, in Darwin (footnote 17), II, 13. For a discussion of Darwin's theory of confirmation, see P. Thagard, ‘Darwin and Whewell’, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 8 (1977), 351–8.
   Google Scholar
• Clifford , W.K. 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. I , 32 – 32 . London 2 vols
   Google Scholar
• Clifford , W.K. 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. I , 10 – 12 . London 2 vols
   Google Scholar
• Clifford , W.K. 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. I , 260 – 260 . London 2 vols
   Google Scholar
• Clifford , W.K. 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. I , 274 – 274 . London 2 vols Darwin had realized as early as 1838 that a theory of human origins ‘would do more toward metaphysics than Locke’ (Darwin (footnote 8), M, 84).
   Google Scholar
• Clifford . 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. II , 300 – 301 . London 2 vols
   Google Scholar
• Clifford . 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. I , 303 – 303 . London
   Google Scholar
• Clifford . 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. I , 281 – 281 . London
   Google Scholar
• Clifford . 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. 2 , 281 – 281 . London
   Google Scholar
• Clifford . 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. 2 , 281 – 281 . London
   Google Scholar
• Clifford . 1879 . Lectures and Essays Edited by: Stephen , L. and Pollock , F. Vol. 2 , 281 – 281 . London
   Google Scholar
• See above Whewell History of the Inductive Sciences London 1837 II 355 355 3 vols
   Google Scholar
• This means that Darwin's theory itself undermined the basis for the belief in its certain truth. Clifford followed this argument up in Virchow on the Teaching of Science Stephen L. Pollock F. London 1879 II 286 321 where he argued that Darwin's theory itself, although the best available was not theoretically certain.
   Google Scholar
• See, for example Peirce C.S. Selected Writings Wiener P.P. New York 1958 15 39 and 142–60; and K. R. Popper, ‘Evolution and the Tree of Knowledge’ in his Objective Knowledge (Oxford, 1972), 250–84.
   Google Scholar
• Darwin . More Letters of Charles Darwin Edited by: Darwin , F. and Seward , A.C. Vol. I , 395 – 395 . New York 2 vols 1903 I have argued here that Darwin was the author of an epistemological revolution. He was also the author of a methodological revolution in the 1860s as he overthrew the old vera causa doctrine requiring proven causes of evolutionary change. For an account of this achievement see my article, ‘Are Methodologies Theories of Scientific Rationality?’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 37 (1986), 135–61 (section 5).
   Google Scholar