________________
EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF SELF-SUFFICIENT VALIDITY' 1367
The objection that this involves Infinite Regress has already been refuted. Hence there is no truth (conclusiveness) in the premiss that "what is valid does not need the corroboration of another Cognition ". Because for the purposes of certainty, such corroboration is always needed. (3074)
The same idea is further explained
TEXT (3075).
IT IS ONLY WHEN THE VALIDITY IS THERE THAT CERTAINTY REGARDING IT IS BROUGHT ABOUT BY THIS (CONFIRMATION), AND THIS
DOES NOT PRODUCE A FRESH VALIDITY IN IT. (3075)
COMMENTARY.
This also serves to set aside the argument set forth under Text 2899— to the effect that-"Even in a case where the thing is definitely apprehended by the later Cognitions, the thing has not been clearly apprehended by the first Cognition ".-Because the fact of the certainty of validity being brought about by later Cognitions cannot deprive the first Cognition of that validity which consists in its capacity to lead to its object.-(3075)
It has been argued under Text 2900, that—"no validity could belong to the Cognition of a thing that is destroyed immediately on being born, etc. etc.".
TEXT (3076).
IN THE CASE OF THE THING THAT IS DESTROYED IMMEDIATELY ON BEING BORN, VALIDITY DOES BELONG TO THE COGNITION ; IN FACT, IT IS THERE, EVEN IN A CASE WHERE THERE IS NO CERTAINTY REGARDING IT, THE CERTAINTY APPEARING IN THE MANNER
DESCRIBED.-(3076)
COMMENTARY.
Sa'-validity.--(3076)
The manner in which certainty appears is described in the following:
