4. Explain the concept of Vada, Jalpa and Vitanda. Which one is best for acquiring knowledge in your opinion? Discuss
Answers
Answer:
These are the three types of arguments which are used in the Hindu system of Logic
1. DISCUSSION [vāda]
Def: A dialogue in which one adopts one of two opposing positions.
The purpose of Discussion is to arrive at the truth of the proposition under consideration. This may be achieved by talking about the topic with anyone who is a sincere seeker of Truth. It is debate between disputants who are engaged in an honest, friendly and balanced debate. A fair-minded and respectful discourse.
In vāda it is not necessary to establish one's own thesis, it is enough to submit one's views for examination in order to ascertain the Truth.
The discussion does not necessarily have to take into consideration the opposite opinion; it is enough to put any proposition to the test of logic.
The usual procedure is to maintain the thesis by means of Right Knowledge and to attack the counter-thesis by means of tarka. This is the most worthy form of dialogue.
REFUTATION ONLY [vitaṇḍa]
Def: A kind of wrangling, which consists in mere attacks on the opposite side. (This is frequently met with here on Quora!)
In vitaṇḍa-vāda there is no desire to establish any proposition. The only interest is to refute and heckle the speaker by carping and offering frivolous objections. No counter-thesis is offered or advanced.
Polemics and Cavilling, which are considered as forms of Discussion, may be used by an aspirant of Truth only as means of protecting one's young and fragile knowledge which has not yet matured into a full blossomed conviction.
One may occasionally encounter objectionable people who, devoid of true knowledge, are puffed up with their academic achievements or are deluded by their own erroneous convictions. These people may try to impose their views and beliefs on others. Under such circumstances the student is urged to make use of these argumentative devices in order to safeguard the development of knowledge in the same way that nature uses thorns on some plants to safeguard the growth of its fruit.
If one’s philosophy or belief system is under attack then one may also employ these negative means for self-defence. One should never gratuitously criticize or attack anyone else’s belief system, ideology or way of life if that person is keeping to themselves. When a person tries to impose their views on others then defence is required.
ERISTIC [jalpa].
Def: A vigorous verbal disputation directed at gaining victory only.
The sole purpose of engaging in an eristic argument is simply to gain victory over the other party and not to discover the truth. (Another popular form of argument frequently met with here!)
There’s no desire to either gain further knowledge of Truth or to establish one’s own position, and therefore, one can employ any device of debate in order to win.
These devices are usually of an underhanded or negative character, such as attacking the opponent’s character, (argumentum ad hominem) quibbling, advancing futile arguments, reducing to absurdity, evading the issue, focussing on examples or metaphors rather than on the actual argument itself etc.
hope it's helpful to u ;)
Vada ( Discussions), Jalpa ( Wranglings), and Vitanda ( Cavils) are the teachings from Goutam Buddha's Nyaya Sutra.
Vada means Discussion. These takes place between two persons in the form of Debate. People are exchanging their thoughts and learnings and listen to the opponent's also. The two learned person wants to draw a logical conclusion at the end of Vada.
Jalpa means contention between two individual or parties. These basically took the form of argument between two parties and every one tries to prove them as correct over others.
Vitanda refers to faultfinding or nap on one another. The arguer is only interested in proving the other side wrong by hook or by crook.
Though all of the above are to be carried by learned persons but they are differ from each other in respect of agenda that is there.
Out of all these, Vada is best for acquiring knowledge as at the end logical conclusion can be found between the person involved.
#SPJ2