Given below are two statements: one is labelled as Assertion A and the other is labelled as Reason R. In the light of the above statements, choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below:
Assertion (A):As per classical Indian School of Logic the argument "All knowable objects are nameable; the pot is a knowable object. Therefore the pot is nameable." is an invalid argument.
Reason (R):In the above argument middle term and major term agree only in presence, there being no negative instance of their agreement in absence.
ABoth A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A
BBoth A and R are correct but R is not the correct explanation of A
CA is correct but R is not correct
DA is not correct but R is correct ✓ Correct
Correct answer: (D) A is not correct but R is correct
Explanation
The assertion is mistaken while its reason states a correct fact, so the assertion is not correct but the reason is.
Everything whatever is both knowable and nameable, so there is no counter-instance where the terms fail together.
Such reasoning, resting only on agreement in presence with no negative case, is the kevalanvayi or only-positive inference.
Classical Nyaya accepts kevalanvayi inference as valid, so calling the pot argument invalid is wrong.
The reason correctly notes that middle and major agree only in presence, but that very fact makes the inference sound rather than fallacious.
Want more like this? Create a free account to practise a full test, track your progress, and get spaced-repetition review.
Practise on Mcqkart →🎓 Book an expert →