Multi-Pramāṇa Rationalism

Research record

The first basic tenet of the parallel philosophy proposed in this text is that of multidimensional rationalism. This does not mean that all evidence is the same or that all beliefs can be true. It means that there is truth and knowledge is possible, but knowledge is not the only kind of evidence. Direct estimates, reliable statements, documents, historical sources, scientific experiments, self-experience, statistical data, and institutional records are their respective domains of reference. Accept the multiplicity of evidence, not the chaos of evidence. The human question is not a uniform one. The way to know the effects of medicines is different from personal religious experience. the way to know the dates of ancient dynasties is different from laboratory-testing. the way to know the experiences of personal suffering is different from census-tables. Evidence that is reasonable in one area may be insufficient in another. Multiplicity takes into account these regional differences. The evidence is overwhelming, but the decision requires testing. Prudence means that the claims made should be clear, the evidence should relate to the claim, the contrary evidence should be heard, the credibility of the sources should be checked, the conclusions should be limited by the strength of the evidence, and revisions should be possible when new evidence emerges. This is not infallibility; it is disciplined error correction. Direct perception is a strong source of immediate experience, but confusion is possible. Inferences range from the known to the unknown, but require scope or causality. Words or testimonies are the basis of vast social knowledge, but the credibility of the speaker, institution, and source must be tested. Documentation is evidence of history, but construction - intent and silence are to be seen. Scientific testing is one of the best public practices in empirical questions of nature, but ethical values do not emanate from the laboratory itself. Self-realization may be meaningful evidence of private life, but not an automatically sufficient basis for universal public claims. Personal religious experiences can be a deep foundation of faith for individuals. But we felt that this was not a public enough reason to impose the law on other citizens. In this way, private evidence is not compromised; its scope is clear. The same principle applies in other areas: individual success does not prove economic policy. a patient 's experience does not prove the universal effect of medicine. a record does not prove the whole history. Multidimensional rationalism does not make science always superior, folklore always inferior, or vice versa. The question is the nature of the claim. Folklore is important for the study of what communities consider sacred, as instrumental data for weather temperatures are more accurate than folktales. Contemporary inscriptions to ancient events may be a more direct historical source than later legends. The value of the proof is context-specific, and the truth is not arbitrary. Nyaya, Mīmāṃsā, Buddhist and other Indian traditions debate at length the number, nature, and authenticity of the Puranas. Multidimensional rationalism draws inspiration from these traditions, particularly by making knowledge-sources the subject of analysis rather than the repetition of a single classical school. Modern science, historiography, sociology, and digital source-review are also included in this framework. Empiricism shows the importance of experience, rationalism shows the structure of reasoning, pragmatism results in inquiry, social epistemology shows the role of testimony and agency, and modern fallibilism shows the importance of revisionism. Parallel philosophy does not make a closed synthesis of these insights; it communicates them problem by problem. If everyone said we needed evidence and there was no common standard, then public knowledge would be fragmented. Medical tests and rumors, records and fiction, expert statistics and made-up numbers are not on the same level. Plurality is not the same thing as equality. There are many types of proof, but the claim-proof relationship will be worthy of public criticism.

Structured debate

Pūrvapakṣa

Multidimensionality does not become relativism after all

Uttarapakṣa

No, because the types of evidence are considered to be numerous and the standard of truth is not exhaustive. Each claim must bear reasonable area proof, rationale, counterarguments, and amendments. The formula is: Accept plurality of evidence, not chaos of evidence.

Parallel conclusion

Multidimensional rationalism is the epistemological basis of parallel philosophy. It rejects on the one hand the imperialism of a single system of evidence; on the other hand, the anarchy of all these equal sources. Truth is to be found in objective evidence, shared criticism, source-review, epistemic humility, and revisionism.

Section index

1. 65.1 Why is it important to be multidimensional?
2. 65.2 Why is there a difference between rationalism and
3. 65.3 The area of the proof
4. 65.4 Private Causes and Public Causes
5. 65.5 Non-categorization or contextualization of the evidence
6. 65.6 Interaction with Indian Credentials
7. 65.7 Dialogue with Western epistemology
8. 65.8 Proof - Why Arrogance is Unacceptable
9. 65.9 Four-Level Conclusion - Language
10. 65.10 Authority and proof
11. 65.11 Ethical Limitations
12. 65.17 False equilibrium
13. 65.18 Order of proof-collection
14. 65.19 The Modern Form of the Apat
15. 65.20 Preface: Multidimensionality is Relativism
16. 65.12 Area-limit of the proof
17. 65.13 The level of trust
18. 65.14 Expert dissent
19. 65.15 Certifiable Rating of Experience
20. 65.16 The evidence and the judgment

Cite this record

Gajendra Thakur. “Multi-Pramāṇa Rationalism.” Videha Digital Research Archive: Mithila–Vajji–Anga. Videha — https://www.videha.co.in/ · ISSN 2229-547X · GitHub mirror: https://videha-ejournal.github.io/videha/ · Digital Research Archives on GitHub: https://github.com/videha-ejournal. https://videha-ejournal.github.io/mithila-vajji-anga/records/idea/philosophy-65/