Raghunātha Śiromaṇi (Padārthatattvanirūpaṇa) contends that parāmarśa collapses the distinction between inference and memory, since it is merely a recollective synthesis of previously acquired cognitions.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Cognitions(epistemology): Acts of thinking, knowing, or perceiving; the mental processes by which we gain beliefs and understanding.
Padārthatattvanirūpaṇa(the specific text being referenced): The title of one of Raghunātha's most important works; it translates roughly to 'An Investigation of the Nature of Categories' and explores what kinds of things exist and how we understand them.
Raghunātha Śiromaṇi(the philosopher being discussed): A major Indian philosopher from the 16th century who developed sophisticated theories about how we know things and what exists; he's especially known for his work on logic and epistemology (the study of knowledge).
Recollective synthesis(what parāmarśa does according to Raghunātha): The act of piecing together or combining memories and past experiences in your mind to form a new understanding.
inference(Nyāya epistemology): A component of epistemology in Nyāya philosophy; a veritable inference yields knowledge about the world and must have premises that are themselves known
memory(Naiyāyika epistemology): A reproduction of a past knowing experience, conceived as a surrogate for the original experience whose veracity is dependent on that of the original
parāmarśa(Technical term in the causal analysis of inference): The 'consideration': an awareness that combines the two premises of an inference immediately prior to the conclusion being derived

2 topics