Indian Syllogism

Plamen Gradinarov plamen at ORIENTALIA.ORG
Wed Mar 8 12:33:24 UTC 2006

I believe the way we arrive at the universal (and apodictic) character of the invariable concomitance (vyapti) has nothing to do with the Indian inferential mechanism, in the same way as the way we arrive at the universality of "All men are mortal" is not part of the Aristotelian syllogism. Our certitude that the major premise is true is arrived at by means of practice, experience (both ordinary and extraordinary), or authority. There is no whatsoever difference between

Universal affirmative:

All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
.:. Socrates is mortal


All dhumavan paksas are vahniman
Parvato dhumavan
.:. Parvato vahniman

Both are perfect examples of deductive reasoning.

Particular affirmative:

Some mortals are men (the condition being zoon politikon)
Socrates is a mortal (zoon politikon)
.:. Socrates is a man


Some vahniman paksas are dhumavan (the upadhi being wet indhanam)
Parvato vahniman (where the fuel is wet)
.:. Parvato dhumavan

Best regards,

Indian Logic Forum -
Nyaya Experts Registry -

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list