4,652
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 27:
Line 27: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Philosophical Discourse (सम्भाषा) (view source)
Revision as of 18:58, 8 September 2020
, 18:58, 8 September 2020Content added from Types of Discourse page and edited
And this methodology of philosophical debate in India, gave rise to the study of the form of correct arguments and inference patterns as part of the science of Logic.<ref name=":0" />
And this methodology of philosophical debate in India, gave rise to the study of the form of correct arguments and inference patterns as part of the science of Logic.<ref name=":0" />
==वादविद्या ॥ Vada Vidya==
Nyaya, one among the [[Shad Darshanas (षड्दर्शनानि)|Shad Darshanas]], deals with well-organized logical ways of ascertaining the true nature of the objects and subjects of human knowledge (Pramana Shastra). It is also called Tarka vidya (logic) and Vada vidya or Vadartha (reasoned argument); and is included among the Chaturdasha Vidyasthanani (fourteen principal branches of learning).
The Nyaya Sutras mainly treat five subjects:
#Pramana (instruments or means of right knowledge)
#Prameya (the object of right knowledge)
#Vada (debate or discussion)
#Avayava (the elements or steps of syllogism)
#Anya-mata-pariksha (review or examination of the doctrines of other Schools)
Therefore, types of debates and arguments come under the purview of Nyaya Shastra.
While discussing Vada, Nyaya Sutra talks about sixteen [[Padarthas (पदार्थाः)|padarthas]] (topics or categories) involved in the development of the debate (Vada marga). They are
*The four reliable means of obtaining valid knowledge (pramana). Namely, Pratyaksha (perception), Anumana (inference), Upamana (comparison) and Shabda (reliable testimony)
*The five-part syllogism (Nyaya)
*The structure (Vada vidhi)
*The ways of developing sound evidence (Pramana)
*The logical reasoning (tarka) to support one's thesis which needs to be proved (Pratijna) and its object (Nirnaya)
*The disciplined (Anushasana) mode of presentation (Vadopaya) and the exceptions (Prthaka-prasthana)
*The limits or the ‘dos and don’ts’ (Vada maryada) of three formats of such debates.<ref name=":3" />
===The Nyaya Model===
Akshapada defined a method of philosophical argumentation, called the Nyaya method or the Nyaya model. This was the standard for an ideally organized philosophical disputation. Seven categories are identified as constituting each the "prior" and "posterior" stage of a Nyaya''.'' A Nyaya starts with an initial doubt, as to whether ''p'' or not-''p'' is the case, and ends with a decision, that ''p'' (or not-''p,'' as the case may be). The seven categories of the prior stage include,
#Doubt
#Purpose
#Example
#Basic Tenets
#The "limbs" (Avayavas) of the formulated reasoning
#Supportive Argument (Tarka)
#Decision.
Out of these 7 categories, the need for 'Purpose' is self-explanatory, the 'example' is needed to ensure that the arguments would not be just empty talk, while the 'basic tenets' supply the ground rules for the argumentation.
The "limbs” (Avayavas) were the most important formulation of the structure of a logical reasoning; these are a landmark in the history of Indian logic. According to the Nyayasutras'','' there are five "limbs" or "steps" ([[Pancha Avayavas (पञ्चावयवाः)|Pancha Avayavas]]) in a structured reasoning. And they should all be articulated linguistically. Each of these 5 steps are explained with an example in the following table.
{| class="wikitable"
|+Pancha Avayavas - 5 Steps in a Structured Reasoning
!Sr.no.
!The Step or Limb
!Example
|-
|Step 1
|The statement of the thesis
|There is fire on the hill.
|-
|Step 2
|The statement of reason or evidence
|For there is smoke.
|-
|Step 3
|Citation of an example (or a particular case) well-recognized and acceptable to both sides that illustrates the underlying (general) principle and thereby supports the reason or evidence.
|(Wherever there is smoke, there is fire), as in the kitchen.
|-
|Step 4
|The showing of the present thesis as a case that belongs to the general case. For reason or evidence is essentially similar to the example cited.
|This is such a case (smoke on the hill).
|-
|Step 5
|The assertion of the thesis again as proven or established
|Therefore it is so, i.e., there is fire on the hill.
|}
The Nyaya school asserted all along that this Nyaya method is used by the arguer to convince others. And that, to satisfy completely the expectation (akanksha) of another, you need all the five "limbs" or steps. This is in fact a full-fledged articulation of an inference schema.
Returning to the Nyaya method itself, the supportive argument (tarka) is needed when doubts are raised about the implication of the middle part of the above inference schema. Like, Is the example right? Does it support the evidence? Is the general principle right? Is it adequate? The "supportive arguments” would examine the alternative possibilities, and try to resolve all these questions. And thus, after the supportive argument, comes the decision, one way or another.
Another seven categories were identified as constituting the "posterior" stage of the Nyaya method. They consist of,
*The three types of debate (Vada, Jalpa and Vitanda)
*The group of tricks
*False rejoinders
*Clinchers or defeat situations
*Pseudo-reason or Pseudo evidence.<ref name=":0" />
== References ==
== References ==
<references />
<references />