Stuk 86 - William Whewell to Richard Jones

Trinity College - WW is angry with Lockhart [John G. Lockhart] for having published his review of John Herschel ['Modern Science: Inductive Philosophy', Quarterly Review 45, 1831] but suppressing his one of RJ: 'I cannot say that I much like the review of Herschel now that I look at it in cold blood, and I have a strong persuasion that all the philosophical part will repel most and puzzle the rest'. WW is amused by RJ's encounters with Whately [Richard Whately]: 'I am quite ready to fight and very confident of getting the better' - but to do so effectively they need more examples - 'in short if you would get your wages published. The feeling on which Whately grounds his opinions, that principles of action are known by consciousness and do not require detailed observation...is plain and generally assumed and it will take some trouble to eradicate. The analogy between physical and political or economical science is yet to be shewn. There is no want of abundant means of shewing the actual folly and essential baseness of their method, but if this be made the permissible nature of the dispute people will ask you to reckon your points: so vindicate as fast as you can'.