This document discusses different classifications of inference according to Nyaya philosophy. It describes three classifications based on psychology, vyapti (universal relation), and logic. For the vyapti classification, it defines purvavat, sesavat, and samanyatodrsta inferences. For the logical classification, it defines kevalanvayi, kevala-vyatireki, and anvaya-vyatireki inferences based on their positive or negative relations between terms. Examples are provided to illustrate each type of inference.
This document discusses different classifications of inference according to Nyaya philosophy. It describes three classifications based on psychology, vyapti (universal relation), and logic. For the vyapti classification, it defines purvavat, sesavat, and samanyatodrsta inferences. For the logical classification, it defines kevalanvayi, kevala-vyatireki, and anvaya-vyatireki inferences based on their positive or negative relations between terms. Examples are provided to illustrate each type of inference.
This document discusses different classifications of inference according to Nyaya philosophy. It describes three classifications based on psychology, vyapti (universal relation), and logic. For the vyapti classification, it defines purvavat, sesavat, and samanyatodrsta inferences. For the logical classification, it defines kevalanvayi, kevala-vyatireki, and anvaya-vyatireki inferences based on their positive or negative relations between terms. Examples are provided to illustrate each type of inference.
This document discusses different classifications of inference according to Nyaya philosophy. It describes three classifications based on psychology, vyapti (universal relation), and logic. For the vyapti classification, it defines purvavat, sesavat, and samanyatodrsta inferences. For the logical classification, it defines kevalanvayi, kevala-vyatireki, and anvaya-vyatireki inferences based on their positive or negative relations between terms. Examples are provided to illustrate each type of inference.
ameya18deshpande@gmail.com Classification of Inference Naiyayikas gives 3 different classifications of Inference; Based on- a) Psychology b) Vyapti c) Logic Lets see- a) Psychological classification is further of 2 types- 1. svartha 2. parartha (already discussed) b) Based on vyapti, Nyaya classifies anumana into 3 types- 1. purvavat 2. sesavat 3. samanyatodrsta While purvavat & sesavat are based on ‘causal uniformity’, samanyatodrsta is based on ‘non-causal uniformity’ Online Philosophy Lectures By OLD MONKS ameya18deshpande@gmail.com Classification of Inference In purvavat anumana, we infer unperceived effect from a perceived cause Eg: future rain predicted from dark clouds In sesvata anumana, we infer unperceived cause from a perceived effect Eg: inference of past rain from muddy river water These inferences are based on ‘Scientific Induction’ i.e. cause & effect relation i.e. universal correlation i.e. vyapti samanyatodrsta anumana is based on non-causal uniformity i.e. we infer one from other bcoz they are uniformly related in our experience. Eg: when we perceive change of position we perceive motion as in case of moon, we don’t see actually moving moon but we can infer its motion based on the change of its position. Online Philosophy Lectures By OLD MONKS ameya18deshpande@gmail.com Classification of Inference c) Based on Logic, Nyaya classifies anumana into 3 types- 1. kevalanvayi 2. kevala-vyatireki 3. anvaya-vyatireki Kevalanvayi anumana is based on POSITIVE relation between middle term (hetu) & major term (sadhya) Eg: All that is knowable is nameable & its vice versa, both are true, as there exists positive relation between knowable & nameable ! kevala-vyatireki anumana is based on NEGATIVE relation. Here knowledge of vyapti is arrived at only by method of agreement in absence. Eg: What is not ‘different from other elements’ has no smell, and Earth has smell, so, Earth is ‘different-from-other-elements’ Hope its clear! Online Philosophy Lectures By OLD MONKS ameya18deshpande@gmail.com Classification of Inference anvaya-vyatireki anumana is when middle term & major term both are positively & negatively related to each other. Following 2 examples will illustrate it- 1. All smoky objects are fiery The hill is smoky Therefore hill is fiery 2. No non-fiery object is smoky The hill is smoky Therefore hill is fiery
Online Philosophy Lectures By OLD MONKS
ameya18deshpande@gmail.com Thanks for watching You can comment or write your queries & mail me at ameya18deshpande@gmail.com
Next video will continue on Inference (Theory of