________________
Circularity in the inductive justification...
109
inductive generalizations of the warrani-drstānta (that is, the tarka justification which appeals to the lack of counter examples, NCE).13 (4) Note that (2) uses and presupposes a general theory of inference (parāthānumāna). That is, in the justifica. tion a specific vyāpti relation one must utilize other inductive generalizations as a larger theoretical (meta)argumentative framework, a general theory of vyāpti, by means of which one justifies the specific vyāpti claim in a specific inference schema. The legitimacy of the general theory of concomitance (vyāpti) is then a necessary condition for the justification of the specific concomitance which, in turn, when accepted, con stitutes a necessary condition for the acceptance of the specific vyāpti of the specific inference schema in question. Hence, we have here obvious, if implicit, circularity. However, to evaluate the significance of such circularity, I shall further analyze the pragmatic NCE justification of turka.
The justification member (hetu) of the inference scbema is offered as direct evidence, "there is smoke.” The general warrant (drsțānta) of the schama, 14 "where there is smoke there is fire,” is offered to support the conclusion (pratijñā) that the presense of a specific fire is a warranted and a "licensed" "sanctioned” conclusion. We should note is passing that the controversy here is not about the structure or for m of the inference schema as in case of the deductive meta. logical concept of formal validity; rather the controversy is about the legitmacy of both the general and specific grounds for its inferential basis, that is, the warrant.dȚsțānta which states the concomitance (vyāpti). The hetu (smoke) given here as empirical evidence is easily verified by our normal percep. tion; thus the legitimacy of the metalanguage drsļānta-warrant in the justification argument which presupposes the metalevel vyāpti, is the crucial point. Tarka, so claim the Jainas, is a unique means of legitimate knowledge (pramāņa) which legitima tizes the vyāpti claimed in the drsčānta-warrant. Tarka then is the explicitly reasoned procedure which authorizes the inductive generalization generated from the many experiential
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
