The Mīmāṃsaka tradition (Kumārila, Ślokavārttika) holds that inference operates through śabda-like apprehension of invariable concomitance, not through a synthesizing mental act distinct from perception.

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

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Invariable concomitance(as the sole basis for valid reasoning according to Gaṅgeśa): A relationship where two things always happen together or one always follows the other without exception; it's like how smoke always goes with fire.
Kumārila(as the philosopher whose argument is being discussed): An influential Indian philosopher from the 7th century who developed important theories about how we know things are true and how we can justify our beliefs.
Mīmāṃsaka tradition(as the philosophical school being discussed): An ancient school of Indian philosophy focused on interpreting sacred texts and understanding how we know things; they developed detailed theories about logic and reasoning.
Synthesizing mental act(as what the Mīmāṃsaka tradition argues inference is NOT): A separate mental process where the mind combines or puts together different pieces of information to create knowledge.

Based on where you are in your exploration