Anumāna: Kevalānvayi, Kevalavyatireki, Anvaya-Vyatireki YouTube Lecture Handouts

Get top class preparation for competitive exams right from your home: get questions, notes, tests, video lectures and more- for all subjects of your exam.

Anumāna: Kevalānvayi, Kevalavyatireki, Anvaya-Vyatireki (Indian Philosophy)

Title: Anumana

Anumana – Inference – (Smoke & Fire)

Paksha - Sapaksha
  • Inferential cognition (anumiti) is a proposition that follows from the first two propositions and so corresponds to the conclusion of the syllogism vyapti expresses the relation of invariable concomitance of hetu (middle term) with the sadhya (major term) .
  • The middle term (smoke) when appearing on paksha is called Linga (sign) while in vyapti it is called hetu (reason) .
  • Sadhya
  • Paksha - Sapaksha: The place where the sadhya definitely is exists is Sapaksha (kitchen) &
  • Vipaksha: The place where the sadhya is definitely absent is vipaksha (lake)
    • Hetu
    • Linga
    • Drstanta (Example)
  • Pakshadharmata (Special Feature of the Subject) - judgment of such a perception. E. g. , existence of smoke on mountain. Pakshadharmata of the paksha is essential for proving sadhya (fire) on the paksha
  • Paramsa: The process of inference relates the sadhya or major term to the paksha or minor term. This is done through the relation of the hetu to both the paksha (by Pakshadharmata) and the sadhya (by vyapti) . Subsumptive reflection is the knowledge of reason (hetu) existing on the paksha together with the knowledge of invariable concomitance (vyapti) between hetu and sadhya.

Anumana

  • Kevalānvayi
  • Kevalavyatireki
  • Anvaya-Vyatireki

Kevalānvayi

  • An inference is called Kevalānvayi when it is based on a middle term which is only positively related to the major term.
  • Here the knowledge of Vyapti between the middle and major terms is arrived at only through the method of agreement in presence (anvaya) , since there is no negative instance of their agreement in absence.
  • Agreement in presence
  • This resembles with Mill method of agreement. e. g. , All knowable objects are namable.

Example of Kevalānvayi

  • All knowable objects are namable.
  • The Pencil is a knowable object.
  • This is illustrated in the following inference:
  • Major Premise: All knowable objects are nameable;
  • Minor Premise: The pot is a knowable object;
  • Conclusion: The pot is nameable.
  • In this inference the major premise is a universal affirmative proposition in which the predicate ‘nameable’ is affirmed of all knowable objects. This universal proposition is arrived at by simple enumeration of the positive instances of agreement in presence between the knowable and the nameable. Corresponding to this universal affirmative proposition we cannot have a real universal negative proposition like ‘No unnameable object is knowable,’ for we cannot point to or name anything that is unnameable. The minor premise and the conclusion of this inference are also universal affirmative propositions and cannot be otherwise. Hence with regard to its logical form the Kevalanvayi inference is a syllogism of the first mood of the first figure, technically called BARBARA.

Kevalavyatireki

  • A kevala-Vyatireki inference is that in which the middle term is negatively related to the major term. It depends on a vyapti or a universal relation between the absence of the major term and that of the middle term.
  • Accordingly, the knowledge of vyapti is here arrived at only through the method of agreement in absence (vyatireka) , since there is no positive instance of agreement in presence between the middle and major terms excepting the minor term.

Agreement of Absence

This resembles with Mill՚s method of difference

Hence the major premise is a universal negative proposition-arrived at by simple enumeration of negative instances of agreement in absence between the major and middle terms.

  • No non-soul is animate;
    • All living beings are animate;
    • Therefore, all living beings have souls.
  • What is not different from the other elements has no smell;
    • The earth has smell;
    • Therefore, the earth is different from the other elements.
  • Symbolically put the inferences stand thus:
    • No not-P is M
    • S is M
    • Therefore S (minor) is P (major) .
  • In the second inference above, it will be seen, the middle term ‘smell’ is the differentia of the minor term ‘earth.’ An inference which is thus based on the differentia (laksana) as the middle term is also called kevala-vyatireki.
  • In it the minor term is con-extensive with the middle. Hence, we have no positive instance of the coexistence of the middle with any term but the minor. So, there can be vyapti or universal relation only between the absence of the middle and the absence of the major term.

Anvaya-Vyatireki

  • An inference is called Anvaya-Vyatireki when its middle term is both positively and negatively related to the major term. In it there is vyapti or a universal relation between the presence of the middle and the presence of the major term as well as between the absence of the major and the absence of the middle term.
  • The knowledge of the vyapti on which the inference depends, is arrived at through the joint method of agreement in presence and in absence.
  • This resembles with Mill՚s joint method of agreement and difference.

1st Example of Anvaya-Vyatireki

  • All Smoky objects are fiery
  • The hill is smoky

2nd Example of Anvaya-Vyatireki

  • No non-fiery objects are Smoky.
  • The hill is smoky

Developed by: