A Monstrous Inference called Mahāvidyānumāna and Cantor's Diagonal Argument.
A mahāvidyā inference is used for establishing another inference. Its Reason ( hetu) is normally an omnipresent ( kevalānvayin) property. Its Target ( sādhya) is defined in terms of a general feature that is satisfied by different properties in different cases. It assumes that there is no (relevant)...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Indian Philosophy Vol. 44; no. 3; pp. 557 - 580 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Jul2016
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=115900403&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 115900403 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00221791 OI3 jtl: Journal of Indian Philosophy issn: 00221791 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jul2016 vid: 44 iid: 3 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 115900403 10.1007/s10781-015-9276-5 ppf: 557 ppct: 23 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 707KB tig: atl: A Monstrous Inference called Mahāvidyānumāna and Cantor's Diagonal Argument. aug: au: Guha, Nirmalya affil: Fulbright-Nehru Fellow, Department of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin, Austin USA su: Smoke Theory of knowledge Fire Signs & symbols Eleventh century sug: subj: Smoke Theory of knowledge Fire Signs & symbols Eleventh century keyword: Cantor Counterbalancing Diagonal argument Kulārka Paṇḍita Mahādeva Bhaṭṭavādīndra Mahāvidyā ab: A mahāvidyā inference is used for establishing another inference. Its Reason ( hetu) is normally an omnipresent ( kevalānvayin) property. Its Target ( sādhya) is defined in terms of a general feature that is satisfied by different properties in different cases. It assumes that there is no (relevant) case that has the absence of its Target. The main defect of a mahāvidyā inference μ is a counterbalancing inference ( satpratipakṣa) that can be formed by a little modification of μ. The discovery of its counterbalancing inference can invalidate such an inference. This paper will argue that Cantor's diagonal argument too shares some features of the mahāvidyā inference. A diagonal argument has a counterbalanced statement. Its main defect is its counterbalancing inference. Apart from presenting an epistemological perspective that explains the disquiet over Cantor's proof, this paper would show that both the mahāvidyā and diagonal argument formally contain their own invalidators. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Journal of Indian Philosophy is a copyright of Springer, 2016. All Rights Reserved. item: Journal of Indian Philosophy holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2016 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|