Whewell’s letters and papers, mostly unpublished, are found in the Whewell Collection, Trinity College Library, Cambridge. A selection of letters was published by I. Todhunter in William Whewell, An account of his Writings, Vol. II (London, 1876) and by J. Stair-Douglas in The Life, and Selections from the Correspondence of William Whewell (London, 1882).

During his lifetime Whewell published approximately 150 books, articles, scientific papers, society reports, reviews, and translations. The list that follows mentions only his most important philosophical works relevant to the discussion above. More complete bibliographies can be found in Snyder (2006), Yeo (1993) and Fisch and Schaffer (1991).

Primary Literature: Major Works by Whewell

• (1831) “Review of J. Herschel’s Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy (1830),” Quarterly Review, 90: 374–407. (Scholar)
• (1833) Astronomy and General Physics Considered With Reference to Natural Theology (Bridgewater Treatise), London: William Pickering.
• (1840) The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded Upon Their History, in two volumes, London: John W. Parker.
• (1844) “On the Fundamental Antithesis of Philosophy,” Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 7(2): 170–81. (Scholar)
• (1845) The Elements of Morality, including Polity, in two volumes, London: John W. Parker.
• (1846) Lectures on Systematic Morality, London: John W. Parker.
• (1847) The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded Upon Their History, 2nd edition, in two volumes, London: John W. Parker.
• (1848) “Second Memoir on the Fundamental Antithesis of Philosophy,” Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 8(5): 614–20. (Scholar)
• (1849) Of Induction, With Especial Reference to Mr. J. Stuart Mill’s System of Logic, London: John W. Parker (Scholar)
• (1850) “Mathematical Exposition of Some Doctrines of Political Economy: Second Memoir,” Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 9: 128–49. (Scholar)
• (1852) Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, London: John W. Parker.
• (1853) Of the Plurality of Worlds. An Essay, London: John W. Parker.
• (1857) “Spedding’s Complete Edition of the Works of Bacon,” Edinburgh Review, 106: 287–322. (Scholar)
• (1857) History of the Inductive Sciences, from the Earliest to the Present Time, 3rd edition, in two volumes, London: John W. Parker.
• (1858a) The History of Scientific Ideas, in two volumes, London: John W. Parker.
• (1858b) Novum Organon Renovatum, London: John W. Parker.
• (1860a) On the Philosophy of Discovery: Chapters Historical and Critical, London: John W. Parker.
• (1860b) “Remarks on a Review of the Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences,” letter to John Herschel, 11 April 1844; published as essay F in 1860a.
• (1861) (ed. and trans.) The Platonic Dialogues for English Readers, London: Macmillan.
• (1862) Six Lectures on Political Economy, Cambridge: The University Press.
• (1864) The Elements of Morality, Including Polity, 4th edition, with Supplement, Cambridge: The University Press.
• (1866) “Comte and Positivism,” Macmillan’s Magazine, 13: 353–62. (Scholar)

Secondary Literature

In the past twenty years, Whewell’s name and ideas have appeared with much greater frequency in general works on nineteenth-century British science and philosophy, a sign that his importance in and influence upon these areas has been recognized. The list that follows is a selection of works focused more specifically on Whewell and his philosophy, and in which his ideas are closely examined.

• Becher, H., 1981, “William Whewell and Cambridge Mathematics,” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 11: 1–48. (Scholar)
• –––, 1986, “Voluntary Science in Nineteenth-Century Cambridge University to the 1850s,” British Journal for the History of Science, 19: 57–87. (Scholar)
• –––, 1991, “Whewell’s Odyssey: From Mathematics to Moral Philosophy,” in Menachem Fisch and Simon Schaffer (eds.), William Whewell: A Composite Portrait. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–29. (Scholar)
• Brewster, D., 1842, “Whewell’s Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences,” Edinburgh Review, 74: 139–61. (Scholar)
• Brooke, J.H., 1977, “Natural Theology and the Plurality of Worlds: Observations on the Brewster-Whewell Debate,” Annals of Science, 34: 221–86. (Scholar)
• Buchdahl, G., 1991, “Deductivist versus Inductivist Approaches in the Philosophy of Science as Illustrated by Some Controversies Between Whewell and Mill,” in Fisch and Schaffer (eds.) 1991, pp. 311–44. (Scholar)
• Butts, R., 1973, “Whewell’s Logic of Induction,” in R.N. Giere and R.S. Westfall (eds.), Foundations of Scientific Method, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 53–85. (Scholar)
• –––, 1987, “Pragmatism in Theories of Induction in the Victorian Era: Herschel, Whewell, Mach and Mill,” in H. Stachowiak (ed.), Pragmatik: Handbuch Pragmatischen Denkens, Hamburg: F. Meiner, pp. 40–58. (Scholar)
• Cannon, W. F., 1964, “William Whewell: Contributions to Science and Learning,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society, 19: 176–91. (Scholar)
• Cowles, H. M., 2016, “William Whewell, Charles Peirce, and Scientific Kinds,” Isis, 107: 722–38. (Scholar)
• Dethier, C., 2018, “William Whewell’s Semantic Account of Induction,” HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 8: 141–56. (Scholar)
• Donagan, A., 1992, “Sidgwick and Whewellian Intuitionism: Some Enigmas,” in B. Schultz (ed.) 1992, pp. 123–42. (Scholar)
• Ducheyne, S., 2009, “Whewell, Necessity and the Inductive Sciences: A Philosophical-Systematic Survey,” South African Journal of Philosophy, 28: 333–58. (Scholar)
• –––, 2010a, “Whewell’s Tidal Researches: Scientific Practice and Philosophical Methodology,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science (Part A), 41: 26–40. (Scholar)
• –––, 2010b, “Fundamental Questions and Some New Answers on Philosophical, Contextual, and Scientific Whewell,” Perspectives on Science, 18: 242–72. (Scholar)
• –––, 2011, “Kant and Whewell on Bridging Principles Between Metaphysics and Science,” Kant-Studien, 102: 22–45. (Scholar)
• –––, 2014, “Whewell’s Philosophy of Science” in W.J. Mander (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of British Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 71–88. (Scholar)
• Fisch, M., 1985, “Necessary and Contingent Truth in William Whewell’s Antithetical Theory of Knowledge,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 16: 275–314. (Scholar)
• –––, 1985, “Whewell’s Consilience of Inductions: An Evaluation,” Philosophy of Science, 52: 239–55. (Scholar)
• –––, 1991, William Whewell, Philosopher of Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
• Fisch, M. and S. Schaffer (eds.), 1991, William Whewell: A Composite Portrait, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
• Gaukroger, S., 2019, “Whewell, Mill, and the Birth of the Philosophy of Science,” in S. Gaukroger (ed.), Knowledge in Modern Philosophy, London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, pp. 185–201. (Scholar)
• Guillaumin, G., 2005, “William Whewell’s Idea of Historical Causation: Some Methodological and Epistemological Differences with Herschel,” Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, 85: 357–75. (Scholar)
• Harper, W., 1989, “Consilience and Natural Kind Reasoning,” in J.R. Brown and J. Mittelstrass (eds.), An Intimate Relation, Dordrecht: D. Reidel, pp. 115–52. (Scholar)
• Herschel, J., 1841, “Whewell on Inductive Sciences,” Quarterly Review, 68: 177–238. (Scholar)
• Hesse, M.B., 1968, “Consilience of Inductions,” in Imre Lakatos (ed.), The Problem of Inductive Logic, Amsterdam: North Holland Publication Co., pp. 232–47. (Scholar)
• –––, 1971, “Whewell’s Consilience of Inductions and Predictions [Reply to Laudan],” Monist, 55: 520–24. (Scholar)
• Honenberger, P., 2018, “Darwin among the Philosophers: Hull and Ruse on Darwin, Herschel, and Whewell,” HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 8: 278–309. (Scholar)
• Hutton, R.H., 1850, “Mill and Whewell on the Logic of Induction,” The Prospective Review, 6: 77–111. (Scholar)
• Laudan, L., 1971, “William Whewell on the Consilience of Inductions,” Monist, 55: 368–91. (Scholar)
• –––, 1980, “Why was the Logic of Discovery Abandoned?” in T. Nickles (ed.), Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, Dordrecht: D. Reidel, pp. 173–183. (Scholar)
• Losee, J., 1983, “Whewell and Mill on the Relation between Science and Philosophy of Science,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 14: 113–26. (Scholar)
• Lugg, A., 1989, “History, Discovery and Induction: Whewell on Kepler on the Orbit of Mars,” in J.R Brown and J. Mittelstrass (eds.), An Intimate Relation, Dordrecht: D. Reidel, pp. 283–98. (Scholar)
• McCaskey, J., 2014, “Induction in the Socratic Tradition,” in P.C. Biondi and L. Groarke (eds.), Shifting the Paradigm: Alternative Perspectives on Induction, Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, pp. 161–92. (Scholar)
• Menke, C., 2018, “The Whewell-Mill Debate on Predictions, from Mill’s Point of View,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A, 69: 60–71. (Scholar)
• Mill, J.S., 1836, “Dr. Whewell on Moral Philosophy,” Westminster Review, 58: 349–85. (Scholar)
• Millgram, E., 2014, “Mill’s and Whewell’s Competing Visions of Logic,” in A. Loizides (ed.), Mill’s A System of Logic: Critical Appraisals, New York and London: Routledge, pp. 101–21. (Scholar)
• Morrison, M., 1990, “Unification, Realism and Inference,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 41: 305–332. (Scholar)
• –––, 1997, “Whewell on the Ultimate Problem of Philosophy,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 28: 417–437. (Scholar)
• Niiniluoto, I., 1977, “Notes on Popper as a Follower of Whewell and Peirce,” Ajatus, 37: 272–327. (Scholar)
• Peirce, C.S., 1865 [1982], “Lecture on the Theories of Whewell, Mill and Comte,” in M. Fisch (ed.), Writings of Charles S. Peirce: Chronological Edition, Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 205–23. (Scholar)
• –––, 1869 [1984], “Whewell,” in Max H. Fisch (ed.), Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A Chronological Edition (Volume 2), Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 337–45. (Scholar)
• Quinn, A., 2016, “William Whewell’s Philosophy of Architecture and the Historicization of Biology,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 59: 11–19. (Scholar)
• –––, 2017, “Whewell on Classification and Consilience,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 64: 65–74. (Scholar)
• Ruse, M., 1975, “Darwin’s Debt to Philosophy: An Examination of the Influence of the Philosophical Ideas of John F.W. Herschel and William Whewell on the Development of Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 6: 159–81. (Scholar)
• –––, 1976, “The Scientific Methodology of William Whewell,” Centaurus, 20: 227–57. (Scholar)
• –––, 1991, “William Whewell: Omniscientist,” in M. Fisch and S. Schaffer (eds.) 1991, pp. 87–116. (Scholar)
• Sandoz, R., 2016, “Whewell on the Classification of the Sciences,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A, 60: 48–54. (Scholar)
• Schultz, B. (ed.), 1992, Essays on Henry Sidgwick, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
• Singer, M., 1992, “Sidgwick and 19th century Ethical Thought,” in B. Schultz (ed.), Essays on Henry Sidgwick, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 65–91. (Scholar)
• Snyder, L.J., 1994, “It’s All Necessarily So: William Whewell on Scientific Truth,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 25: 785–807. (Scholar)
• –––, 1997a, “Discoverers’ Induction,” Philosophy of Science, 64: 580–604. (Scholar)
• –––, 1997b, “The Mill-Whewell Debate: Much Ado About Induction,” Perspectives on Science, 5: 159–198. (Scholar)
• –––, 1999, “Renovating the Novum Organum: Bacon, Whewell and Induction,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 30: 531–557. (Scholar)
• –––, 2005, “Confirmation for a Modest Realism,” Philosophy of Science, 72: 839–49. (Scholar)
• –––, 2006, Reforming Philosophy: A Victorian Debate on Science and Society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Scholar)
• –––, 2008, “The Whole Box of Tools: William Whewell and the Logic of Induction,” in John Woods and Dov Gabbay (eds.), The Handbook of the History of Logic (Volume IV), Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 163–228. (Scholar)
• –––, 2011, The Philosophical Breakfast Club: Four Remarkable Men who Transformed Science and Changed the World, New York: Broadway Books. (Scholar)
• –––, 2021, “Experience and Necessity: The Mill-Whewell Debate,” in J.R. Brown (ed.), Philosophy of Science, The Key Thinkers, 2nd ed., London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, pp. 11–30. (Scholar)
• Strong, E.W., 1955, “William Whewell and John Stuart Mill: Their Controversy over Scientific Knowledge,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 16: 209–31. (Scholar)
• Tangle, K.B., 2019, “The Fate of William Whewell’s Four Palaetiological Domains: A Comparative Study,” Perspectives on Science, 27: 810–38. (Scholar)
• Van Der Merwe, R., forthcoming, “Whewell’s Hylomorphism as a Metaphorical Explanation for how mind and World Merge,” Journal for General Philosophy of Science/Zeitschrift für Allgemeiene Wissenshaftstheorie. (Scholar)
• Wilson, D.B., 1974, “Herschel and Whewell’s Versions of Newtonianism,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 35: 79–97. (Scholar)
• Yeo, R., 1993, Defining Science: William Whewell, Natural Knowledge, and Public Debate in Early Victorian Britain, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)