________________
Such is the process when we reason for ourselves. But if we have to convince some body else of what we by inference know to be valid, the case is different. We then start with the assertion, the hill is fiery. We are asked, why? and we answer, because it smokes. We then give our reason or the major premise, that all that smokes is fiery as you may see, for instance, on a kitchen hearth and the like. Now you perceive the hill does smoke and hence you will admit that I was right when I said the hill is fiery. Such being the processes of reasoning we generally adopt when we try to convince any one of the truth and validity of Our statement, it is called Par&rthânum&n.
(b) Parârthanumân (quaigata) is a statement expressive of reason () or middle term standing in relation of invariable concommitance with what is to be proved (1) or major term having been composed of the minor term (a).
Inference for othersillustrated.
73
Parârthánu mân Defined
Comparative
It is important to note that Paksha (a) which corresponds with the minor term study of the syllogistic vocabularies of the European logic is defined to be
