Journal of Philosophical Logic

, Volume 40, Issue 5, pp 563–582 | Cite as

Possible Ideas of Necessity in Indian Logic

Article
  • 125 Downloads

Abstract

It is often remarked that Indian logic (IL) has no conception of necessity. But what kind of necessity is absent in this system? Logical necessity is presumably absent: the structure of the logical argument in IL is often given as a reason for this claim. However even a cursory understanding of IL illustrates an abiding attempt to formulate the idea of necessity. In Dharmakīrti's classification of inferences, one can detect the formal process of entailment in the inferences arising from class inclusion. In Western philosophy, Leibniz's invocation of 'contingent necessity' as distinguished from the 'necessary necessity' is part of a tradition that finds value in the idea of contingent necessity. In contemporary philosophy, this has been championed by Armstrong, specifically in the context of understanding the necessity inherent in scientific laws. In IL, the analysis of 'invariable concomitance' (vyāpti) is of crucial importance and its definitions are very complex. This paper argues how vyāpti can be understood in terms of contingent necessity and also how the complex definitions can be interpreted as an attempt to define contingent necessity in terms of 'logical' necessity.

Keywords

Necessity Analyticity Vyāpti Pervasion Invariable concomitance Everpresent properties Possible worlds Scientific law Absence Limitors 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Armstrong, D. M. (1985). What is a law of nature? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhattacharyya, S. (1974). Some features of Navya-Nyāya logic. Philosophy East and West, 24, 329–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhattacharyya, S. (1987). Doubt, belief and knowledge. Delhi: ICPR.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chakrabarti, K. K. (1976). Some comparisons between Frege’s logic and Navya-Nyāya logic. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 36, 554–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chakrabarti, K. K. (1987). The svabhāvahetu in Dharmakīrti’s logic. Philosophy East and West, 37, 392–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chakraborty, K. (1978). Definition of vyāpti (pervasion) in NavyaNyāya: a critical survey. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 5, 209–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chakravarti, R.-P. (2002). A comparative treatment of the paradox of confirmation. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 30, 339–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chatterjee, A. (1996). Natural laws, accidental generalizations and vyāpti (pp. 123–150). III: Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dunne, J. (2004). Foundations of Dharmakīrti’s philosophy. Wisdom Publications.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ellis, B. (2001). Scientific essentialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fine, K. (2005). Modality and tense: Philosophical papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ganeri, J. (2009). Analytic philosophy in early modern India. Retrieved December 24, 2009 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/early-modern-india/.
  13. 13.
    Grayling, A. C. (1997). An introduction to philosophical logic. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guha, D. C. (1979). Navya Nyāya system of logic. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Itzykson, C., & Zuber, J.-B. (1980). Quantum field theory. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kneale, W. (1961). Universality and necessity. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, XII, 89–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lange, M. (2008). Why contingent facts cannot necessities make. Analysis, 68(2), 120–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewis, D. (1973). Counterfactuals. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Matilal, B. K. (1968). Gaṅgeśa on the concept of universal property (Kevalānvayin). Philosophy East and West, 18, 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Matilal, B. K. (1968). The Navya-nyāya doctrine of negation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Matilal, B. K. (1985). Logic, language and reality. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Matilal, B. K. (1999). In J. Ganeri & H. Tiwari (Eds.), The character of logic in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Matilal, B. K. (2004). In H. Tiwari (Ed.), Necessity and Indian logic. Delhi: Chronicle Books.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mumford, S. (2004). Laws in nature. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Perrett, R. W. (1984). The problem of induction in Indian philosophy. Philosophy East and West, 34, 161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Phillips, S., & Tatacharya, R. (2002). Gaṅgeśa on the upadhi. Delhi: ICPR.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Potter, K. H. (1992). The karmic a priori in Indian philosophy. Philosophy East and West, 42, 407–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Quine, W. V. (1947). The problem of interpreting modal logic. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 12, 43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Quine, W. V. (1961). Two dogmas of empiricism. In W. V. Quine (Ed.), From a logical point of view (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sarukkai, S. (2004). Philosophy of symmetry. Shimla: IIAS.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sarukkai, S. (2005). Indian philosophy and philosophy of science. Delhi: CSC/Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sarukkai, S. (2008). A semiotic interpretation of Indian logic. In M. K. Chakraborti et al. (Eds.), Logic, Navya-Nyāya & applications (pp. 287–304). London: College Publications.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Swinburne, R. G. (1975). Analyticity, necessity and apriority. Mind, 84, 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vaidya, A. V. (2006). The metaphysical foundation of logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 35, 179–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Manipal Centre for Philosophy and HumanitiesManipal UniversityManipalIndia

Personalised recommendations