Logical Positivism vs Vedanta: Post 2 of 2

[Guest guest]

Dear Baghavatas,

Namo Narayana.

 

Yesterday I posted on the logical positivist view on valid sources of knowledge.

Today's post contains a brief summary of the Vis'istAdvaita Vedanta view on

valid sources of knowledge.

-

Every rational theory, that is thorough and systematic, has as its substratum

the sources of knowledge that it accepts as valid. Given this it is natural for

us to begin our outline of the philosophy of Vedanta, with a brief discussion of

the valid sources of knowledge. The vedantin approaches knowledge in much the

same way as the mathematician approaches the concept of sets. The existence of

sets is a fundamental truth, an axiom of perception, yet the application of a

general definition is not feasible. Mathematicians accept the limitation and

describe the concept of set in a "most perfect" manner by making use of a

collection of axioms that specify the properties of sets. The vedantin handles

the definition of knowledge in a similar manner. Knowledge is so basic that it

is impossible to define it in terms of more basic notions. However, knowledge

can be described in a most "perfect manner" by specifying its properties.

Knowledge reveals the presence of an object as well as itself; its revelation of

things is always for another. [1] Metaphorically speaking, "Knowledge is like a

lamp which can reveal the presence of an object as well as its own, but cannot

see either." [1]

 

The vedantin recognizes three independent valid sources of knowledge; mainly

perception, inference, and verbal testimony. Knowledge generated by direct

contact of sense organs with matter, energy or properties of matter and energy

within the realm of the senses is denoted perceptual knowledge. Knowledge which

is generated by words is denoted verbal knowledge. Words are either imbibed

through the visual or auditory organs or are retrieved from memory. Verbal

knowledge can be related to matter and energy as well as existents that cannot

be classified as either matter or energy. Knowledge in the form of conclusions

derived through inference is denoted inferential knowledge. Of the three

perception is most important as the others are dependent on it.

 

The choice of these three independent valid sources of knowledge is by no means

arbitrary. Our common experience tells us that sense organs are a source of

knowledge about matter and energy. However, there are many existents, within the

realm of common experience that cannot be classified as either matter or energy.

Verbal testimony is the only means by which knowledge about such existents is

obtained. Thus, verbal testimony is another independent valid source of

knowledge. The reasoning for why inference is also an independent valid source

of knowledge goes as follows. Although the basis of inference (the premises) is

derived from perceptual knowledge and/or knowledge from verbal testimony, the

outcome of inference, the conclusion, represents new knowledge. Thus, inference

is also an independent valid source of acquiring knowledge.

 

[1]- Fundamentals of Vi'sistAdvaita

 

ramanuja dasan,

Venkat

Note: This is just a draft

-

Note: The source for what follows is Sri. S.M. Srinivasa Chari's *Fundamentals

of Vis'istAdvaita: A study based on Vedanta Des*ika*s: Tattva-MuktA-KalApa*. The

method of presentation used here differs from that of Sri. Chari, but the

substance is mainly derivied from Sri. Chari*s book. Any credit should

rightfully go to Sri. Chari and any discredit for errors in presentation are

mine alone.