Pramanas MCQ Quiz in தமிழ் - Objective Question with Answer for Pramanas - இலவச PDF ஐப் பதிவிறக்கவும்

The correct answer is 'Appeal to Ignorance'

Key Points

• Appeal to Ignorance:
  • This fallacy occurs when someone argues that a proposition is true simply because it has not been proven false, or vice versa.
  • In the given statement, the argument is that people with flu should be kept in quarantine because it has never been disproven as the best method. This is an appeal to ignorance as it relies on the lack of disproof rather than positive evidence.

Additional Information

• Hasty Generalisation:
  • This fallacy involves making a broad generalisation based on a small or unrepresentative sample.
  • It is not applicable here because the argument does not rely on insufficient evidence to make a general claim.
• Slippery Slope:
  • This fallacy occurs when it is assumed that a relatively small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact.
  • This is not the case in the provided statement as it does not argue that quarantining flu patients will lead to a significant series of events.
• False Cause:
  • This fallacy occurs when it is assumed that because one event follows another, the first event must be the cause of the second.
  • The statement does not claim a cause-and-effect relationship between two events, so this fallacy does not apply.

There are six major schools of Vedic philosophy—Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Mīmāṃsā, and Vedanta, and five major heterodox (sramanic) schools—Jain, Buddhist, Ajivika, Ajñana, and Charvaka.

Important Points

Vaisesikas:

• Vaisheshika or Vaiśeṣika is one of the six schools of Indian philosophy (Vedic systems) from ancient India.
• In its early stages, the Vaiśeṣika was an independent philosophy with its own metaphysics, epistemology, logic, ethics, and soteriology.
• Over time, the Vaiśeṣika system became similar in its philosophical procedures, ethical conclusions, and soteriology to the Nyāya school of Hinduism, but retained its difference in epistemology and metaphysics.

Buddhists:

• Buddhists believe death is a natural part of the life cycle.
• They believe that death simply leads to rebirth.
• This belief in reincarnation – that a person’s spirit remains close by and seeks out a new body and new life – is a comforting and important principle.
• For Buddhists, death is not the end of life, so it is not something to be feared.
• Where and how a person is reborn depends on their good and bad actions in past lives.

Charvaka:

• Charvakas have refuted verbal testimony as a valid source of knowledge because it is based on the statement of some reliable person/ scripture.
• And to find a reliable person is based on inference which is not a valid source of knowledge.
• Comparison is also not accepted as the source of valid knowledge by charvakas.

Hence, Vaisesikas, Charvaka and Buddhists schools of Classical Indian Philosophy reduce Sabda pramãna (verbal authority) to inference.

Vyapti (Invariable relations):

• Vyapti is the nerve of inference or Anumana.
• It means means ‘the state of pervasion.’
• It implies a correlation between two facts, of which one is pervaded and the other pervades 
• For example, smoke is pervaded by fire
• A Vyapti may be of two types—
  1. ​​Samavyapti: A Vyapti between terms of equal extension
  2. Asamavyapti: a Vyapti between terms of unequal extension 

"Wherever there is smoke, there is fire.

There is smoke in Mr Verma's chamber.

There must be a fire in Mr Verma's chamber."

• This universal relationship between fire and smoke, so it is an example of Vyapti.

• The existence of fire is necessary to be admitted in every case of smoke.

• Without the definite knowledge of such a relation, our inference of fire is impossible in spite of the perception of smoke.

Pramanas:

• Pramanas are proofs or 'means of knowledge'.
• It is the theory of knowledge and encompasses valid and reliable means of knowledge.
• The sis pramanas are 
  • Pratyaksa: means the perception both internal and external. It acquires through sensory organs and the mind.
  • Anumana: means inference, which accepts the truth based on the observation and previous truths.
  • Sabda: means verbal testimony, A sentence that is a means of valid knowledge is called verbal testimony.
  • Upamana: means comparison, It is knowledge derived from comparison and roughly corresponds to analogy. 
  • Arhapatti: means implication, It is the assumption of an unperceived fact in order to reconcile two apparently inconsistent perceived facts
  • Anupalabdhi: means non-perception, the perception of the non-existence of a thing.
• In different schools of philosophy, they accept different means of knowledge or different pramanas.

Dictionary of philosophy defines inference as the process that refers to “the drawing of a conclusion.” It is also called reasoning. Pramana term is commonly found in various Hinduism schools and it means "proof" and "means of knowledge". In Indian philosophies, pramana is the means which can lead to knowledge, and serve as one of the core concepts in Indian epistemology. The focus of pramana is how correct knowledge can be acquired, what one already knows, what one doesn't know etc.

Key Points

Many ancient and medieval Indian texts identify six pramanas as correct means of accurate knowledge :

1. Pratyaksa (Perception)
   • Implies direct, immediate cognition.
   • It is of two types: external and internal.
   • External is described as arising from the interaction of five senses and worldly objects; cognition of sense objects, namely – sound, touch, form, taste, and smell.
   • Internal perception means the direct & immediate cognition of pain, pleasure, love, hate, anger, knowledge or ignorance of various objects, etc. in & by our minds. 
2. ​Anumana (Inference)
   • ​​Inference depends on knowledge obtained through perception.
   • Described as reaching a new conclusion and truth from one or more observations and previous truths by applying reason.
   • We see smoke on the hill, we infer there is fire (new conclusion), as we have seen wherever there is smoke there is a fire in our kitchen (previous truth).
   • The inference is conditionally true if sapaksha (positive examples as evidence) are present, and if vipaksha (negative examples as counter-evidence) are absent.
3. ​Anupalabdi (Non-perception, Negative Proof)
   • ​​Proof of knowledge from negation or absence of a thing.
   • If something can be observed as non-existent or impossible, then one knows more than what one did without such means.
   • Example: In a college, Mr. A has not attended any lecture today. So it must mean that he went to watch a movie.
4. ​Sabda (Relying on word)
   • ​​Testimony of past or present reliable experts.
   • This means of gaining proper knowledge is either spoken or written, but through Sabda (words).
   • The reliability of the source is important, and legitimate knowledge can only come from the Sabda of reliable sources.​

Hence, "There is no fruit in the basket, it means the basket is empty" - this form of knowledge is known as Anuplabdhi.​

Hetvabhasa is a Sanskrit term that means fallacy in the English language. In other words, in Indian logic, a fallacy is called Hetvabhasa.

• A fallacy occurs when the middle term appears to be the reason but it is not a valid reason.
• There are five kinds of fallacies according to Nyaya school.
• All the five fallacies are regarded as material fallacies.
• Material fallacies occur when the reasoning is unsound because of an error concerning the subject matter of the argument.
• Material fallacies are also known as fallacies of presumption.

Satpratipaksha:

• Satpratipaksha is a term stemming from the Nyāya Darśana, an Indian school of logic.
• Literally, 'Satpratipakṣa' translates to 'inferentially contradicted middle'. This refers to when the existence of a 'probandum' (a major term or concept that is being established) simultaneously causes the consideration or establishment of another contradicting term.
• This causes a sort of counterbalancing in reasoning. This principle is often seen during inferences or anumāna in Indian logical systems.
• For example, if one is trying to make the argument that sound is eternal, but in doing so, they simultaneously present or cause the consideration of a reason that indicates the non-eternity of sound, this is an example of Satpratipaksha. This situation would cause a counterbalance in the argumentation or analysis.
• In simpler terms, Satpratipaksha occurs when the reasoning or explanation provided for the existence of a concept unintentionally gives rise to another contradicting concept, causing a sort of confusion or counterbalance in the logical reasoning process.

Sadharana: 

• It occurs when the middle term is too wide in nature.
• As a result, it is present in both positive (sapaksa) and negative (vipaksa) instances.
• So, it violates the rule that the middle term should not be present in negative instances.
• Example: the hill has fire because it is knowable. Here, knowable can be present in both, fiery and non-fiery objects. 

Asadharana:

• It occurs when the middle term is too narrow in nature.
• As a result, it is present only in the Paksha and neither in sapaksa nor in vipaksa.
• So, it violated the rule that the middle term must be present in Paksha (pakshasasattva).
• Example: the sound is eternal because it is audible.

Anupasamhari: 

• It occurs when the middle term is non-exclusive.
• So, the minor term is all-inclusive and leaves nothing by the way of sapaksa or vipaksa.
• Example: all things are non-eternal, because they are knowable.

Thus, in Satpratipaksha fallacy given by Indian logic, the middle term is contradicted by another middle term.

Central questions in epistemology are the origin of knowledge the role of experience in generating knowledge and the role of reason in doing so, the relationship between knowledge and the responsibility of an error and changing forms of knowledge that emerge from new conceptualizations of the world. 

Key Points

 Any knowledge has four components:

Therefore, A-II, B-III,C-IV,D-I is the correct match. 

Additional Information

• Perception (pratyaksa), inference (anumana), verbal testimony (sabda), and comparison (pramana) are four important ways to get knowledge (upamana).
• Mimamsa accepts all ways; Yoga accepts only perception, inference, and testimony; Buddhism and Vaisesika accept only perception and inference; and Carvaka accepts only perception.

Pramata – One who obtains true knowledge.

Prameya, It means the proper subject matter of philosophy

Pramana- Evidence is anything that makes you believe that something is true or exists.

Prama- Prama means Knowledge of Truth.

There are so many things that we know indirectly, without the direct aid of the senses. Such means of valid knowledge are classified into six broad groups. These are called Pramanas. Pramanas are valid means of knowledge.

These six means of knowing are 

1. Direct Perception by Sense Contact (Pratyaksa)
2. Inference by Previous Experience (Anumana)
3. Verbal Testimony of the Vedas (Sabda)
4. Knowing by Example (Upamana)
5. Conjecture from Insignificant Information (Arthapatti)
6. Absence of a Thing (Anupalabdhi).

Sagarika is never seen reading any Mathematics book during the daytime. Yet she scored 98% marks in Mathematics. Therefore she must be studying during the night. It is an example of Arthapatti (Implication).

Key Points

• Arthapatti is a Sanskrit term meaning "presumption" or "implication."
• In the yogic philosophy of the Advaita Vedanta system and the Bhatta school of Purva-Mimamsa, it is said to be one of the six pranamas, or means of obtaining knowledge.
• Arthapatti refers to the way in which knowledge is derived from a set of circumstances.
• It is analogous in contemporary logic to the concept of circumstantial implication.
• It generally requires an observation of fact(s) and postulation based on such fact(s) to arrive at the information.

Additional Information

• Pratyaksha - Perception - Acquiring knowledge from experience
• Anumana - Inference - Gaining right knowledge from logical conclusion
• Upamana - Comparison - Learning by observing similarities
• Arthapatti - Postulation - Supposition of a fact to support a well-established fact
• Anupalabdhi - Non-apprehension - Understanding non-existence by non-perception
• Sabda - Verbal testimony - Gaining authentic knowledge from spoken and written words

The Mimamsa system is credited to Jaimini as its main proponent.

Key Points

• The Mimamsa Sutra is the most comprehensive of all philosophical Sutras.
• The commentaries on Sabara-bhasya were written independently by renowned scholars Kumarila Bhatta and Prabhakara.
• Mimamsa accepts the authority of the Vedas and is accepted as the eternal source of a given truth.
• The Mimamsa method places a premium on verbal testimony which is essentially Vedic witness. 
• According to Jaimini, the 'word' or 'Shabda' is always the Vedic word.
• The 'Word' or the 'Shabda' is the only source of knowledge for Jaimini.

​Therefore, Sabda pramana is most important according to Mimamsa.

Additional Information

•  According to Mimamsa philosophy, Vedas are eternal and contain all knowledge and religion is the fulfilment of obligations set by the Vedas.
• Sabarasvamin's Sabara-bhasya is the earliest available commentary.

Vyâpti involves a knowledge of the relation of cause and effect. For the determination of the causal relationship between them, the Buddhists adopt the method of pancakarani.

• There are five steps in the method of pancakarani.
  1. Neither the cause nor the effect is perceived,
  2. The cause is perceived,
  3. The effect immediately succeeds its cause,
  4. The cause disappears,
  5. Immediately the effect disappears.

Key Points

The Naiyayikas maintains that there are five ways or methods for the establishment of vyâpti.

Thus, the correct match is A (I), B (IV), C (II), D (III)

Key Points 

1. In the classical Indian school of logic, also known as Nyaya, the terms "Badhita" and "Viruddha" refer to types of fallacies that involve contradictions.
2. "Badhita" refers to a type of fallacy involving 'invalid knowledge' - that is, knowledge which is contradicted or invalidated by subsequent knowledge.
3. "Viruddha" refers to a contradiction or incompatibility. In logical terms, it represents contradicting inferences.
4. I want to note that interpreting ancient Indian philosophical terms can be complex due to the variation in interpretation across different texts and contexts. But based on most interpretations, "Badhita" and "Viruddha" seem the most closely linked to the notion of contradiction.
5. Contrarily, "Svarupāsiddha" refers to inherent or natural existence, and "Vyapyatväsiddha" most commonly refers to pervaded existence or inherent connection. They don't primarily deal with the concept of contradiction.

Hence, the correct option could be considered as (B) and (D) only.