Abstract
The present paper defends a position advanced in Oetke (J Indian Philos 41:43–55, 2013 (= BS)) to the effect that a piece of reasoning allegedly advocated by proponents of Indian Materialism (Lokāyata, Cārvāka) does not deserve to be dismissed as a sophism but embodies a significant philosophical criticism. In addition the article argues for the contention that for this type of theoretical assessment consideration of history of reception possesses at best a limited relevance and is even apt to impede the attainment of an adequate evaluation of the matter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Copi, I. M. 1982 (1953). Introduction to logic. New York: Macmillan.
Franco, E. (2012). A note on the Sadvitīyaprayoga. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 40, 219–224.
Franco, E. (2013). Further notes on the Sadvitīyaprayoga. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 41, 665–670 (= FS).
Oetke, C. (2012). Ascription of linguistic properties and varieties of content. Two studies on problems of self-reference (Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis. Stockholm Oriental Studies, Vol. 20). Stockholm: Stockholm University.
Oetke, C. (2013). A brief appraisal of the Sadvitīyaprayoga. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 41, 43–55 (= BS).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Oetke, C. Additional Notes on the Sadvitīyaprayoga . J Indian Philos 44, 507–523 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-014-9272-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-014-9272-1