Research For Fallacy In Hetuvidya

Logic of ancient India, that is Hetuvidya, has played a great role of the development of logic theory.Hetuvidya is divided by Dignaga, so it can be called Ancient Hetuvidya and New Hetuvidya. The mainbody of it is debate, and it serves for the debate. As the most important part, fallacy of Hetuvidya ownsgreat value to be researched for. The thesis can be divided into four chapters.In the first chapter, it explains fallacy of Ancient Hetuvidya. There were17items of fallacy inCharaka-Samhita. These various items were unsystematic. However, it is the earliest literature of LogicTheory, and it laid a solid foundation for the research of Logic Theory. Upayakausalyahrdaysastra was astroke above Charaka-Samhita, and it much more clearly expounded fallacy of Hetuvidya, such asvakyaprasamsa, vakyadosa, ahetus, and so on. It increased the nlgrahasthenas into17types, and putforward20related facts for the first time, which was the embryonic form of Jati. Nyayasutra summed upfallacy of Hetuvidya on the basis of thoughts of predecessors, and that fallacy of Hetuvidya mainly consistof samsaya,5Hetvabhasas, chala,24Jatis and22nlagrahasthenas. Tarka-sastra summarized works offormer Hetuvidya masters. It divided ahetus into none, uncertainty and viruddha for the first time, whichachieved a hight success. Fallaycy of Hetuvidya in Yogacarabhumi-Sastra only refered to nlgrahasthena,which included3aspects of abandonment, surrender and fallacy of words. Theories of fallacy of Hetuvidyain earlier Hetuvidya changed differently in logical language and thoughts. The earlier Hetuvidyacontinuously moved forward toughly, and it was a process full of hardships.In the second chapter, it explains fallacy of new Hetuvidya. Dignaga made great revolution on theAncient Hetuvidya, and divided the fallacy of Hetuvidya into and, which is. He reorganized the theory intofourteen types, and it is call fallacy of Hetu,that is Dusanabhasa.He canceled nlgrahasthena. However, thebook of Rigs PaviThings Pa, writen by Dharmakirti, remould Dignaga’s theory Trairupya. It simplymentioned Dusanabhasa，and meant nothing about the nlgrahasthena.In the third chapter, it explains the difference between the two fallacies. The Ancient Hetuvidya andNew Hetuvidya have the same blood, therefore there are still many changes during its development.Because of changes of history, social environment, and fast growing knowledge, fallacy of Hetuvidya has difference of names and classify standards, and even the content. There are difference between AncientHetuvidya and New Hetuvidya, and there are also difference beside the old and new theory system.In the fourth chapter, it explains the analysis of fallacy of Hetuvidya nowadays.Fallacy of Hetuvidyameans errors in the history of western logic. In the three logic system, Hetuvidya’s analysis of fallacy is themost comprehensive and compact. Nowadays, debate steadily develops, and the fallacy of Hetuvidya hasgreat value for people’s reference. Reclassifying fallacy of Hetuvidya from different points of view,analysing it with symbolic logic and informal logic, it’ll be better for it serving the modern society.Fallacy of Hetuvidya is a complex system, and there were obstacles during the development formAncient Hetuvidya to New Hetuvidya. It is a huge treasure in our modern society. If we leave it alone, it’llbe a great lost for human. It’ll be smart for us to make researchment and changes to fallacy of Hetuvidya,making it serve for the society.