List - I
A. Reasoning based upon resemblance to what has been observed in the past
B. Reasoning by the method of elimination
C. Reasoning with the support of what is found in the sphere of sensuous objects
D. Reasoning by keeping discussion within limits and by drawing attention to the point under discussion
List - II
I. Sesavat
II. Puravat
III. Pratijna
IV. Samanyatodrsta
Choose the correct answer from the options given below :
Understanding Indian Reasoning Types Match
This question involves matching different methods of reasoning, described in List - I, with their specific terminology from Indian logic found in List - II. These terms are often discussed in schools of Indian philosophy like Nyaya.
Detailed Explanation of Reasoning Types and Matches
Match A: Reasoning based upon resemblance to what has been observed in the past
This description accurately represents Puravat (List - II, item II). The Puravat mode of inference is based on the observed resemblance between past instances. It involves inferring a future event or condition from a past, similar event or condition, essentially reasoning from cause to effect or from a known pattern to its continuation. For example, if we observe that clouds in the sky usually lead to rain, and we see clouds, we infer that rain is likely.
Match B: Reasoning by the method of elimination
This definition corresponds to Sesavat (List - II, item I). Sesavat inference is typically understood as reasoning from an observed effect to its cause, often implying the elimination of other possible causes. It's a form of inference where the cause is deduced from the presence of its characteristic effect. A common example is inferring fire (cause) from smoke (effect), based on the established relationship that where there is smoke, there is fire.
Match C: Reasoning with the support of what is found in the sphere of sensuous objects
This aligns with Samanyatodrsta (List - II, item IV). Samanyatodrsta refers to inference based on general concomitance or similarity observed through the senses, without necessarily establishing a direct cause-effect link. It involves recognizing common properties or patterns in objects perceived by the senses. For instance, inferring that a mountain has fire because it exhibits smoke, similar to how a kitchen hearth, which we can see and experience, has fire because it has smoke.
Match D: Reasoning by keeping discussion within limits and by drawing attention to the point under discussion
This description fits Pratijna (List - II, item III). In the context of Indian logic, Pratijna is the statement of the thesis or proposition that needs to be proved or discussed. It serves to establish the subject matter and the claim being made, thereby defining the boundaries and focus of the entire argument or discussion.
Summary of Correct Pairings
Based on the explanations, the correct matches are:
| List - I Description | List - II Term | Matched Term Name |
|---|---|---|
| A. Reasoning based upon resemblance to what has been observed in the past | II. Puravat | Puravat |
| B. Reasoning by the method of elimination | I. Sesavat | Sesavat |
| C. Reasoning with the support of what is found in the sphere of sensuous objects | IV. Samanyatodrsta | Samanyatodrsta |
| D. Reasoning by keeping discussion within limits and by drawing attention to the point under discussion | III. Pratijna | Pratijna |
Thus, the correct option reflects the pairing A-II, B-I, C-IV, D-III.
Important Questions from Indian Logic
Given below are two statements:
Statement I: According to Classical Indian Logicians (Naiyāyikas) the inference from the effect of the cause is called Purvāvāt.
Statement II: According to Naiyāyikas the inference of cause from the effect is not possible.
In light of the above statements, choose the correct answer from the options given below:
Given below are two statements : One is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other is labelled as Reason (R):
Assertion (A) : The Naiya̅yikas did not give separate treatment of the inductive methods, as the western logicians have done.
Reasons (R) : According to Nya̅ya school universal propostions are obtained from perception itself by one of the forms of extra-ordinary perception.
In the light of the above statements, choose the correct answer from the options given below:
According to the classical Indian School of Logic which of the following steps of inference involve the application of the universal concomitance to the present case?
(A) This hill has a fire
(B) Because it has smoke
(C) Whatever has smoke has fire, e.g. an oven
(D) This hill has smoke which is invariably associated with fire
(E) Therefore the hill has a fire
Choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below:
Given below are two statements
Statement I: According to Classical Indian School of Logic, the method of induction is used to affirm the major premise, since generality or universality cannot be perceived.
Statement II: Classical Indian Logicians give separate treatment of the inductive method.
In light of the above statements, choose the correct answer from the options given below
Which of the following are admitted by the Naiyayikas (Indian Logicians) as kinds of Inferences?
(A) Inference of the effect from the cause
(B) Inference of the cause from the effect
(C) Inference from knowledge of similarity between two kinds of objects
(D) Inference from observation for general inseparability
Choose the correct answer from the options given below:
