Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive?

碩士 === 法鼓佛教學院 === 佛教學系 === 103 === As a famous Indian Buddhist logician during the 7th Century, Dharmakīrti (600-660) inherited and reformed the logical system developed by his predecessor Dignāga (480-540). His contribution has great influence on the development of Indian Logic, both Buddhist and n...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Tsun Nyen Yong, 釋有暋
Other Authors: Siu-Miao Liu
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2015
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/dzj2uc
id ndltd-TW-103DDBC5841008
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-TW-103DDBC58410082019-05-15T22:17:01Z http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/dzj2uc Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive? 法稱之推理理論:演繹或歸納? Tsun Nyen Yong 釋有暋 碩士 法鼓佛教學院 佛教學系 103 As a famous Indian Buddhist logician during the 7th Century, Dharmakīrti (600-660) inherited and reformed the logical system developed by his predecessor Dignāga (480-540). His contribution has great influence on the development of Indian Logic, both Buddhist and non-Buddhist. Due to its importance in Indian Logic, modern scholars have tried using the traditional classification method found in Western Logic, namely the deductive and inductive methods, in analyzing Dharmakīrti’s inference theory (anumāna), which exhibits many distinctive figures among Indian logical systems. Based on different angle of observations, however, sholars have come out with dissimilar conclusions regarding the charactetistic of his theory. As a result, those who think that it is inductive dispute the conclusions made by those who think that it is deductive, while others believe that it is a mixual of both methods. Therefore, it is the intension of this thesis to re-examine Dharmakīrti’s anumāna theory using the two terms invented by the Western logicians. First of all, it is recognized that the conundrum faced by Indian logicians are simply the process of generating general belief and its correct application in common process. Under this circumstance, the Buddhist logicians developed a logical system that involves two distinct steps. Firstly, through the scrutiny of the method of association (anvaya) and disassociation (vyatireka) between major term (sādhya) and middle term (hetu), the observer concludes with a general belief regarding the relation between the two terms (vyāpti) from his own experiences. Secondly, the observer then applies this general belief onto the minor term (pakṣa) to generate a conclusion. Research shows that while Western Formal Logic only concerns with the second step, it is the first step that becomes primary focus in Dharmakīrti’s inference system, hence indicates its inherence inductive nature. This thesis develops four core issues of discussion concerning some important characteristics found in Indian Logic, namely the process of generating major premise, the method of association and disassociation between two terms, the role of examples (dṛṣṭānta) in inference, and finally the theory of natural relations (svabhāvapratibandha) developed by Dharmakīrti. Besides, the chapter of “Svārthānumāna” in Dharmakīrti’s Nyāyabindu is translated and studied in order to better understand the characteristics of his theory of anumāna. As a result, this thesis concludes that Dharmakīrti’s theory of anumāna reveals strong inductive nature. Siu-Miao Liu 釋見弘 2015 學位論文 ; thesis 89 zh-TW
collection NDLTD
language zh-TW
format Others
sources NDLTD
description 碩士 === 法鼓佛教學院 === 佛教學系 === 103 === As a famous Indian Buddhist logician during the 7th Century, Dharmakīrti (600-660) inherited and reformed the logical system developed by his predecessor Dignāga (480-540). His contribution has great influence on the development of Indian Logic, both Buddhist and non-Buddhist. Due to its importance in Indian Logic, modern scholars have tried using the traditional classification method found in Western Logic, namely the deductive and inductive methods, in analyzing Dharmakīrti’s inference theory (anumāna), which exhibits many distinctive figures among Indian logical systems. Based on different angle of observations, however, sholars have come out with dissimilar conclusions regarding the charactetistic of his theory. As a result, those who think that it is inductive dispute the conclusions made by those who think that it is deductive, while others believe that it is a mixual of both methods. Therefore, it is the intension of this thesis to re-examine Dharmakīrti’s anumāna theory using the two terms invented by the Western logicians. First of all, it is recognized that the conundrum faced by Indian logicians are simply the process of generating general belief and its correct application in common process. Under this circumstance, the Buddhist logicians developed a logical system that involves two distinct steps. Firstly, through the scrutiny of the method of association (anvaya) and disassociation (vyatireka) between major term (sādhya) and middle term (hetu), the observer concludes with a general belief regarding the relation between the two terms (vyāpti) from his own experiences. Secondly, the observer then applies this general belief onto the minor term (pakṣa) to generate a conclusion. Research shows that while Western Formal Logic only concerns with the second step, it is the first step that becomes primary focus in Dharmakīrti’s inference system, hence indicates its inherence inductive nature. This thesis develops four core issues of discussion concerning some important characteristics found in Indian Logic, namely the process of generating major premise, the method of association and disassociation between two terms, the role of examples (dṛṣṭānta) in inference, and finally the theory of natural relations (svabhāvapratibandha) developed by Dharmakīrti. Besides, the chapter of “Svārthānumāna” in Dharmakīrti’s Nyāyabindu is translated and studied in order to better understand the characteristics of his theory of anumāna. As a result, this thesis concludes that Dharmakīrti’s theory of anumāna reveals strong inductive nature.
author2 Siu-Miao Liu
author_facet Siu-Miao Liu
Tsun Nyen Yong
釋有暋
author Tsun Nyen Yong
釋有暋
spellingShingle Tsun Nyen Yong
釋有暋
Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive?
author_sort Tsun Nyen Yong
title Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive?
title_short Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive?
title_full Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive?
title_fullStr Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive?
title_full_unstemmed Dharmakīrti’s Theory of Anumāna: Deductive or Inductive?
title_sort dharmakīrti’s theory of anumāna: deductive or inductive?
publishDate 2015
url http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/dzj2uc
work_keys_str_mv AT tsunnyenyong dharmakirtistheoryofanumanadeductiveorinductive
AT shìyǒumǐn dharmakirtistheoryofanumanadeductiveorinductive
AT tsunnyenyong fǎchēngzhītuīlǐlǐlùnyǎnyìhuòguīnà
AT shìyǒumǐn fǎchēngzhītuīlǐlǐlùnyǎnyìhuòguīnà
_version_ 1719126183819345920