ABSTRACT
This chapter shows John Stuart Mill's view of induction, sketch the main elements of William Whewell's view and remark on a few parallels between the positions and turns to the protagonists' respective modes of argumentation. Mill was committed to arguing for his inductivism inductively; Whewell was analogously committed to giving an argument for his notion of induction that conformed to his views about what it was. The chapter also explains the question of why it is that, almost always, Whewell and Mill strike readers as talking past one another. It describes that this is a misconception, and explain how it was that each of them did their best to provide argumentation that the other party to the dispute would be forced to accept on his own terms. The Mill-Whewell debate was a dramatic illustration of challenges posed by philosophy of logic, and of what it can look like to try to meet them.
