While I am not up to the task of writing a memorial notice, I did want to note that I have enjoyed reading and learning from the work of Richard W. Miller. In particular, I thought his book, Fact and Method: Explanation, Confirmation and Reality in the Natural and Social Sciences (1987), did not receive the widespread attention it deserved. Not long ago I found ample reason (as I had on previous occasions) to share a passage from that work (which covers a wide array of topics) in a short paper I composed, “Friedrich Engels, the English working class, and incipient social epidemiology.” Consider the exquisite and compelling description here of what we now term “social epidemiology” from Miller’s book. The reference to 19th century Manchester immediately reminded me of Friedrich Engels’ “classic indictment” of this rapidly industrializing city in The Condition of the Working Class in England:

“In the organized pursuit of explanation, practical concerns may … dictate choice of a standard causal pattern. In the early nineteenth century, many investigators had come to explain the prevalence of certain diseases in certain places as due to filth and overcrowding. For example, the prevalence of tuberculosis in urban slums was understood this way. In these explanations, the microbial agent was not, of course, described. But the causal factors mentioned were actual causes of the prevalence of some of those diseases. If Manchester had not been filthy and overcrowded, tuberculosis would not have been prevalent. On the purely scientific dimension, acceptance of accurate environmental explanations probably did not encourage as many causal ascriptions as would a standard requiring explanation of why some victims of filth and overcrowding became tubercular, some not. Those who pressed the latter question were to lead the great advances of the germ theory. But in a practical way, the environmental explanations did a superior job, encouraging more important causal accounts. Guided by those accounts, sanitary measures produced dramatic reductions in tuberculosis and other diseases, more dramatic, in fact, than the germ theory has yielded. A perspicacious investigator might have argued, ‘We know that some specific and varied accompaniment of filth and overcrowding is crucial, since not every child in the Manchester slums is tubercular. But we should accept explanations of the prevalence of disease which appeal to living conditions. For they accurately, if vaguely, describe relevant causal factors, and give us the means to control the prevalence of disease.”

a good number of philosophers who have been elected to the American Philosophical Society are not listed in your item. No doubt I noticed because I’m one of them. I will try to link to the announcement of the election of Alexander Nehamas.
https://philosophy.princeton.edu/news/alexander-nehamas-elected-american-philosophical-society