________________
CONCLUSION
193
Realistic attitude is in accordance with commonsense and science. Modern western realists are G. E. Moore, Bertrand Russell, Whitehead, Alexander and Santayana, among others. All of them, though they differ among themselves in some points of details, have one important point in common viz. that knowledge necessarily involves an object beyond itself to which it refers. In the course of time realism has acquired slightly different forms. Neo-realism holds that object perceived is identical with object existent while critical realism believes that the object existing and object perceived are two different entities. However, both agree in holding that perception reveals some object other than consciousness. Yet, there is another form of modern realism known as Relativistic or Functional Realism as formulated by J. E. Boodin. It assumes the reality of substance and qualities independent of thinker and holds that object presented in perception is real but is the function of the thinker and the environment. While Nyāya is naive realism, Jaina realism comes close to this functional realism founded on empirical logic.
As against realism, idealism as an epistemological theory denies objectivity of knowledge. It is clear that idealistic logic cannot build a consistent epistemology. It will not make much sense even if we give a science of knowledge without the object of knowledge. In fact, epistemology becomes difficult, if not impossible, on idealistic assumptions. Idealism carried to its logical conclusion results in the doctrine of intrinsic falsity of knowledge. So we have to admit the independent existence of the objects of knowledge for all serious epistemological purposes. Strictly speaking, idealism is incompatible with epistemology and logic. Those idealists who have built up epistemology had to compromise
Nyā.-13
