How do we know? Notes
Introduction Human beings have been endeavoring to attain knowledge since the ancient times. Though, they have acquired a great amount of knowledge in the last thousands of years, their thirst for knowledge does not seem to be satiated. Actually, all living beings have the capacity to gain some kind of knowledge or other. It is essential for their living. But, the knowledge that different species acquire does not grow with time nor does it appear to be changing in a qualitative manner. However, the depth, extension and subtlety of human knowledge keeps on growing in the course of time. The process of adding to the already accumulated knowledge happens continuously.
We have been observing that it’s the awareness of awareness that distinguishes humans from other living beings. Due to this two-layered awareness, man does not merely have knowledge like other living beings but also is aware of having knowledge. That is why, the concept of ‘knowledge’ itself can become an object of knowledge for him. We experience that pets such as dogs and cats have an instinctive as well as experiencebased knowledge of where to find their prey or which place is dangerous for them. But, do they ever face questions such as “How do I have this knowledge? What do I need to do in order to make this knowledge more precise?”
This does not seem to be the case. Humans however have been raising these and many such questions for last hundreds of years. As we have seen last year, the branch of philosophy called epistemology studies many such questions critically in a detailed manner.
What is knowledge? What is the difference between knowledge on the one hand and other related concepts such as opinion, conviction, belief, information on the other? What are the sources or means of knowledge? How can knowledge be justified? What is truth? In this lesson, let us get acquainted with the way in which many such questions have been considered in both the Indian and the Western tradition. Indian Epistemology We do not use the word ‘knowledge’ in a very precise way in the daily life. We use the term knowledge to refer to our opinions, convictions and beliefs also. We use that word even to denote whatever has been introduced to us, whatever we are acquainted with or whatever we think we understand.
From the perspective of philosophy, this usage of the word is not always appropriate because there is a difference between thinking that we have knowledge and actually having knowledge. What we ‘think’, we ‘understand’ need not be true. If it is not true, it will not be correct to call it knowledge.
Philosophy is interested in the knowledge that qualifies the test of truth. It is the means and types of such knowledge, that Philosophy wants to study. ‘Prama’ is a word that is used in Indian Philosophy for this kind of knowledge that qualifies the test of truth. The word ‘Dnyana’ (knowledge) is used for whatever we comprehend or understand. We come to know the world by way of using many means such as sense perception, reason, memory, testimony etc. But, the world always is not exactly the way we feel, see or understand it.
We have learnt in the previous year that what seems to be the case, may not actually be the case, “Appearances are deceptive.” But in the Indian tradition, even if it has not been examined whether, whatever has been understood is true or false, it is still called dnyana (knowledge). If its truth is established after scrutiny, it is called ‘Prama’. To have ‘prama’ is to know the object as it is, without any error. The person who attains prama is called ‘Pramata’.
The means through which knowledge is gained is called ‘Pramana’. ‘Prameya’ is the object that is known. On the basis of our initial discussion regarding the difference between nonhuman beings and human beings, it can be said that all the living beings other than humans also have knowledge in the sense of Dnyana because they perceive through senses.
But only humans can assess whether the knowledge gained is correct or incorrect, true or false. That means only human beings can attain prama. All the living beings can be called knowers (dnyata), but only human beings can be called pramata. Humans can acquire prama on the basis of their organic, intellectual and linguistic abilities by way of using various means or pramanas such as sense perception, inference, testimony etc. Pramana The consideration of pramanas is at center of the epistemology in Indian tradition. The objective of attaining prama cannot be achieved unless appropriate means of knowledge are used.
That is why, in the Indian tradition one finds an in depth analysis of questions such as what are the means through which prama can be attained? What is the number of such means? What is their nature? etc. The concept of pramana is much deeper than it appears to be. ‘Pramana is a means to attain prama’, is one of the meanings of the term praman. In addition, there are at least two more meanings that the term has. According to one of these meanings, pramana is a kind or a type of prama. This sense of the concept of pramana is accepted by the Bauddha and Jain darshana.
According to them we cannot differentiate between the means of knowledge and their product in the process of knowledge acquisition. Instead, if we classify the knowledge that we gain, on the basis of differences in the nature of instances of knowledge, we would more clearly understand what knowledge is. The types of knowledge or prama that we get through such classification are also called pramanas. The Jain and Bauddha darshana tend to believe that the pramana accepted by the Indian tradition; such as perception, inference, testimony are not only means of prama but also types of prama.
The third sense of the term pramana is evidence or proof, justification or the assurance of the authenticity of knowledge. Even in our ordinary conversation in Marathi, when we ask the question ‘what is the pramana for your argument?’, we are trying to understand what is the evidence for that assertion. We want to know whether it is true or false. This basic meaning of the term pramana is connected to both the meanings stated above. When we say that pramana is an instrument of prama, it means a reliable or an authentic instrument with the help of which prama can be attained. When we say that pramana is a type of prama, it means it is a type of reliable or authentic knowledge.
Nyaya Darshana’s View of Pramana Nyaya darshana has a very important place in the Indian understanding of pramanas. The concepts such as dnyana, prama, aprama, pramana etc. were very systematically put forth initially by the Nyaya philosophers. Let us try to briefly understand their views about pramana. According to Nyaya view, knowledge illuminates the objects of knowledge in the manner in which a lamp illuminates objects in the world. At a gross level, knowledge is divided into two types viz. experience or presentative cognition (Anubhava) and memory or representative cognition (Smruti). We have a direct awareness or understanding of the object in experience, while understanding through memory is in the form of remembering the experience.
Both these types of knowledge are further classified into ‘Yathartha’ (true and valid) and ‘Ayathartha’ (erronous). In yathartha knowledge, the object is known as it actually is. When the object is not known as it is, it is called ayathartha knowledge. Knowledge which is presentative and valid is called prama. Non-valid presentative knowledge is called aprama. Nyaya darshana propounds that prama is gained through four means, namely, perception (pratyaksha), inference (anumana), comparison (upmana) and testimony (shabda). Let us get acquainted with these four pramanas now.
Perception (Pratyaksha) Pratyaksha or perception refers to the sensations that we receive through our senseorgans. We receive the sensations of colour, sound, taste, smell and touch, respectively through the five sense-organs namely, eyes, ears, tongue, nose and skin. We also receive the sensations of pleasure and pain through the mind. This is called perception. Of all the pramanas, this is the primarily important pramana which is accepted by all the darshanas. As per one of the definitions that Nyaya darshana offers, pratyaksha dnyana is a determinate, nonerroneous and true knowledge attained through the contact between sense-organs and the object. Nyaya darshana believes that soul is the knower, who gets knowledge through the chain consisting of the object - the sense-organs - the mind. We get the sensations of perceptible objects and their characteristics like colour, appearance, texture, taste, smell etc. through specific sense-organs. It is necessary to be attentive to or be aware of the object that we want to know directly.
There can be no knowledge if our mind does not pay attention to the object. For example, when we study with full concentration, though we hear certain sounds that fall on our ears, we do not understand them, because we are not paying attention to them. That is, a contact between the ears and the sound takes place, but our mind is elsewhere. It is not connected with the ears in the real sense. Thus it is the function of the mind to pay attention to the specific object of knowledge. Knowledge through sense-experience is a matter of common experience for us.
fall within the range of the experience of the sense-organs is gained by way of extraordinary means. That is why it is called extraordinary perception. Ordinary perception is further classified into the external and the inner or mental perception. External perception is the perception through eyes, nose, ears, skin and tongue; while the knowledge attained by the mind is inner perception. The mind according to Nyaya, is an internal organ. We get the knowledge of pleasure, pain, attachment, aversion etc. through this inner organ. Extraordinary perception is divided into ‘Samanyalakshana pratyasatti’, ‘Dnyanalakshana pratyasatti’ and ‘Yogajlakshan pratyasatti’.
An attribute that is commonly present in many objects of the same type is called a commonality or a universal (samanya). Nyaya darshana believes that when we experience a flower, we do not merely know that particular flower, but also the universal ‘flowerness’. Through this universal, we acquire a universal knowledge of flowers in the form ‘I know what a flower is’. Nyaya darshana believes that this knowledge is attained through samnyalakshana pratyasatti. Similarly, when we see the halfripe tamarind, we know that it would taste sweet and sour, without actually testing it.
We, of course, cannot come to know the taste of anything using our eyes, yet we have such knowledge due to dnyanalakshan pratyasatti. In a like manner, it is believed that a ‘Yogi’ has knowledge of the past, the present and the future. Obviously, it is not possible to have this knowledge by way of sense-perception. It is said that the yogi has this knowledge through yogajlakshana pratyasatti.
Inference (Anumana) Though, it is true that a large part of our knowledge consists of knowledge gained through sense-perception, it is equally true that all our knowledge is not acquired through it. That is why, there is a need for other means of knowledge too! One of the important means among these is logical reasoning. By using logical reasoning in our day-to-day life as well as in science, we attain knowledge of the things that cannot be experienced by the sense-organs. In a closed auditorium, when a door is opened a little, we smell the fragrance of the soil and tell the person sitting next to us that it has started raining, without actually seeing the rain.
When we observe that the particles of iron are being attracted by an object, we conclude that there is magnetic power in that object. Inference or anumana is the logical judgement about that which cannot be directly experienced, on the basis of that which can be directly experienced. The term ‘Anumana’ literally means “knowledge that follows some other knowledge”. What we experience, is a mark or indication of what we do not experience. The pug-marks that we find on the trails in the forest indicate which animals have earlier walked on those paths.
The famous example of inference that Nyaya darshana offers is as follows : When we see smoke on a hill, we infer that “there is fire somewhere on the hill”, because smoke is an indication of fire. In short, we can say that inference is the knowledge of the unknown on the basis of the known. There are three constituents of the process of inference, namely, paksha, hetu and sadhya.
That which we infer or reason about, is called the sadhya. The place or the site with reference to which we derive the existence of the sadhya, is called the paksha. That on the basis of which we prove the existence of the sadhya, is called the hetu. Hetu is the link that connects the paksha and the sadhya. In the example above, the hill is the paksha, where there is smoke which is the hetu. We prove the existence of fire on the basis of
ಕಾಮೆಂಟ್ಗಳಿಲ್ಲ:
ಕಾಮೆಂಟ್ ಪೋಸ್ಟ್ ಮಾಡಿ