Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The argument from neither-one-nor-many is a valid argumen... — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The argument from neither-one-nor-many is a valid argument according to the triple criteria of valid reasoning

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.All instances of the subject (the intrinsic identities of entities asserted by Buddhist and non-Buddhist opponents) are entities which are neither singular nor plural, satisfying the first criterion of a valid reason
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.All phenomena being neither singular nor plural (the reason) is an instance of phenomena which lack identity (the predicate), satisfying the second criterion of forward entailment (anvayavyāpti)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.There are no instances of phenomena which lack identity (the predicate) that are not also instances of phenomena being neither singular nor plural (the reason), satisfying the third criterion of counter entailment (vyatirekavyāpti)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The triple-criteria (trairūpya) framework presupposes a bivalent logical structure that Madhyamaka's own catuṣkoṭi logic explicitly rejects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A valid reason under trairūpya requires determinate positive and negative instances, but śūnyatā-based arguments dissolve the very ontological categories needed to identify such instances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Using trairūpya to validate a conclusion that undermines the identity conditions trairūpya requires is self-vitiating, as Candrakīrti's critics like Candragomin effectively charged.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dharmakīrti's apoha theory establishes that absence of unity and absence of plurality are conceptual exclusions, not real properties that can serve as genuine hetu in an inference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'neither-one-nor-many' names only a double negation rather than a positive characteristic, it fails the pakṣadharmatā condition, since no real locus can instantiate what is purely apophatic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language3 linked

    Related

    A valid reason under trairūpya requires determinate positive and negative instan...All instances of the subject (the intrinsic identities of entities asserted by B...All phenomena being neither singular nor plural (the reason) is an instance of p...Dharmakīrti's apoha theory establishes that absence of unity and absence of plur...
    +4 moreShow less
    If 'neither-one-nor-many' names only a double negation rather than a positive ch...The triple-criteria (trairūpya) framework presupposes a bivalent logical structu...There are no instances of phenomena which lack identity (the predicate) that are...Using trairūpya to validate a conclusion that undermines the identity conditions...

    Similar

    The second and third criteria are mutually entailing and together prov...86%An argument is formally valid if and only if the premises cannot be tr...78%Clifton's reasoning yields a valid Kochen-Specker argument establishin...75%An argument is sound when it is both valid and has true premises75%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: twotruths-india
    View source passageHide passage
    According to Śāntarakṣita the argument from neither-one-nor many satisfies the triple criteria of valid reasoning. It satisfies the first criterion because all instances of the subject, namely the intrinsic identities of those entities asserted by the Buddhist and non-Buddhist opponents, are instances of entities which are neither singular nor plural. The second criterion of a valid reason—the proof of the forward entailment (anvayavyāpti / rjes khyab), i.e., the proof that the reason occurs in
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit