[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
A short glossary of error
-
Subject: A short glossary of error
-
From: shrao@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Shrisha Rao)
-
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 06:01:05 MDT
-
Apparently-To: alt-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Apparently-To: shrisha@lcl.cmu.edu
-
From shrao@nyx10.cs.du.edu Thu Jul 13 09: 46:57 1995
-
Newsgroups: alt.religion.vaisnava
-
Organization: \.o_.r-g*-n*-'za_--sh*n\ n. The act or process of organizing or of being organized; also, the condition or manner of being organized.
Readers sometimes ask me what the meaning of a specific word that I
have used in some specific posting is. Quite often, the word is
defined somewhere else in the same article, or else, has been defined
in a previous posting, or even in more than one of them. Here is a
short list of some words that signify logical or semantic error. This
may save some the effort of asking what a specific word means, and may
also save me the effort of answering the same question over and over.
The definitions in the case of semantic errors are due to Sri
Jayatiirtha. Unfortunately, I do not have the other definitions
memorized, but will post them if I can get a proper annotated copy of
the Pramaana Lakshana.
Semantic errors (shabda-dosha):
Virodha ["Yogyataaviraho virodhaha"] -- This can loosely be translated
as 'opposition,' and the definition reads loosely as: "Lack of ability
is opposition." What the definition means to say is that if a statement
runs counter to one already accepted, and is unable to force its own
way, then it must be rejected, for being opposed to a known fact.
Asangati ["Aakaankshaaviraho asangatihi"] -- This can be translated as
'irrelevance,' and the definition reads: "Lack of fulfilment of
expectation is irrelevance." In a discussion, if a reply given, a point
raised, or a statement made, is not in accordance with the expectation
that it be pertinent to the matter under discussion, then it is
irrelevant.
Nyuunataa ["Vivakshitaa'sampuurtirnyuunataa"] -- This can read as
'nullity,' with the definition reading loosely as: "Non-satisfaction
of the claim constitutes nullity." In a discussion, if someone makes a
claim, and later gives evidence that does not support the claim in
full, then such evidence suffers from nullity, with respect to the
claim. Another type is where a definition given does not cover all
cases of the defined.
Aadhikyam : "Sangataavadhikatvamaadhikyam" -- This can be translated
as 'superfluity,' and the definition as: "An excess over what is
relevant, constitutes superfluity." In a discussion, if someone takes
the meaning or definition of something to cover more than what it
should, then such is superfluous. Another type is where a definition
given covers more than the object, entity, or set to be defined.
Note: Nyuunataa and Aadhikya have also been referred to, in special
cases, as a-vyaapti (non-domination), and ati-vyaapti (over-domination).
The latter, ativyaapti, is the error responsible for what is known as
Russell's paradox.
Logical errors (tarka-dosha):
Aatmaashraya : This can loosely be translated as "assuming the
consequence," in some cases. More generally, however, if something
"rests on itself," in the sense that an object or entity is stated to
have a property such as presence within itself, support of itself, etc.,
then this flaw exists.
Anyonyaashraya : Loosely, "mutual reliance." If a statement is proved by
another, and the latter by the former, then this error exists.
Chakrakaashraya : "circular reliance," aka circular reasoning. A more
general case of the above; if instead of two, we have 'n' number of
disputed statements, that are tied in a circle so that each one proves
the next, then circular reasoning is shown.
Anavasthaa : Infinite regress. If the proof of a statement requires an
assumption, and proof of that assumption requires another, and proof of
that still another, and so on, then infinite regress is said to occur.
Pramaa-haana : "neglect of evidence," as in, when a statement neglects
to take into account the fact that it is in opposition to accepted
evidence. This itself has various forms, Shruta-haana (neglect of
Shruti), drshta-haana (neglect of pratyaksha), etc.
Kalpanaa-gowrava : "Respect for imagination." If a statement must be
assumed without proof, so that an inference based upon it may be
accepted, then the inference is subject to the respect that has been
accorded to one's imagination, and is unacceptable.
Upajiivya-virodha : this has been discussed at great length previously;
please refer
URL: http://www-ece.rice.edu/~vijaypai/arv/1995_04/msg00018.html
Actually, this last kind of error is considered a special case of
pramaa-haana, where the pramaa is the invalid statement's own
upajiivya, but I list it separately since it is so often named and
used by itself.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
