“A Hard Battle to Fight”: Natural Theology and the Dismal Science, 1820–50
研究了威廉·休厄尔和理查德·琼斯如何基于自然神学观点批评边沁和李嘉图的政治经济学方法论，并与理查德·惠特利就科学定义和历史证据作用展开争论。
William Whewell's and Richard Jones's criticism of Jeremy Bentham's and David Ricardo's “dismal” views on the relation of theory and evidence in political economy was motivated by the former's views on the structuring role of natural theology for questions of method and evidence in the sciences, including political economy. In comparison, natural theology was for Richard Whately as structuring on these issues as it was for the Cambridge men. Whately's view on natural theology, however, conformed with the Ricardian predilection for theory over facts. The differences between the Cambridge men and Whately became manifest after (or better: during) the publication of Jones's book on rent in 1831 and led to a somewhat acerbic exchange of views on the role of definitions in science and the use of history for establishing scientific evidence. As far as political economy was concerned, Whately's stance carried the day in Victorian England.