Abstract

Chauncey Wright was a transitional figure in both the American intellectual canon and more generally, in the history of Western philosophy. As regards his philosophy of science---perhaps his greatest contribution---he shares some of the characteristics of positivists like Comte and Mill, yet his adoption and advocacy of Darwinian theory suggests that he was equally a predecessor of American pragmatism. Wright's ideas also suggest a strong influence of traditional empiricism and may presage more modern concepts in the philosophy of science. ;In 1963 Professor Edward H. Madden examined the foundation provided by Wright for the later pragmatists---young men of Cambridge who had come of age during the 1860s and 1870s and who included Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and Oliver Wendell Holmes and other members of the celebrated Metaphysical Club. This book, Chauncey Wright and the Foundations of Pragmatism, remains the single most important monograph specifically on Wright and his subsequent influence. But Wright was as much of a departure as a foreshadow; my dissertation therefore deals will explore the overlap and distinction between Wright and the earlier positivists Comte and Mill and the evolutionist, Herbert Spencer. ;My thesis---based on an observation by Professor Madden---is that Wright may be distinguished from the earlier positivists in part because he believed that deduction was as much of a driving force behind the scientific method as induction. This experimentalism suggests a view of science that relies on forward-looking empiricism . ;Equally important is the fact that Wright regarded hypotheses to be "working ideas" to be deductively tested rather than inductive "summaries of truth." Moreover, his evolutionary views imposed on him a realist outlook where the earlier positivists were phenomenalists. Finally, and in a broader sense, Wright is also important as an example of the reemergence of the dominance of deduction in the scientific method, a trend that has continued to this day. ;These are the aspects I explore and discussion in answering the question about what distinguishes Wright from the more conventional positivists who preceded him