Nyaya Sutras chapter 9

Question 1

List and Define Nyayas Five Components of Inference

Answer 1

1. taking the thesis: presenting ones arguement
2. debating the argument using knowledge and suppersition
3. proving or refuting an argument
4. without contradicting established beliefs
5. Knowledge and supersition

Question 2

Define the three major kinds of debate according to Nyaya. Which one is the most refutable why? What utility do the other kinds have according to Nyaya? Do you agree with commentators on this point? Why or why not?

Answer 2

1. debate in effort to present ones view or gain new knowledge
2. debate for the sake of victory
3. debate for destruction
   Debate for destruction is refutable because the person who presents this view is not seeking to present any kind of thesis and is instead simply trying to attack someone elses thesis and expose it as false. No new knowledge or viewpoints can be encountered and as a result nyaya is not interested in this.

Question 3

What are the first four of the psuedo provers listed by gautama? Give your own example of each:

Answer 3

1. The deviant inconclusive form-deviates from proving the thesis to be correct and does not apply in all scenarios
2. contradictory- proving a thesis while contradicting knowledge known to be true
   ex: we know that bigfoot is real because there are plenty of apes that live in north america that walk on two legs
3. inconclusive- proving a thesis by stating the lack thereof of evidence to prove that it doesn’t exist. By doing this you are neither proving it to be correct nor incorrect and equal amount of evidence is present on both sides ex: we know that there is a god because no one can prove that he does not exist.

Question 4

what is jati? Why should we be on debate for them within debate and argument?

Answer 4

Jati is the act of proving a thesis to be correct using a false argument designed to decieve the opponent in a tricky way. For example matt would be a terrible teacher because he is tall like pete who is also a terrible teacher. It uses similarities and connections with unrelated things to prove an argument. These need to be monitored to avoid erroroneous learnings.