The Pragma-Dialectics of Dispassionate Discourse: Early Nyāya Argumentation Theory

Analytic philosophers have, since the pioneering work of B.K. Matilal, emphasized the contributions of Nyāya philosophers to what contemporary philosophy considers epistemology. More recently, scholarly work demonstrates the relevance of their ideas to argumentation theory, an interdisciplinary area of study drawing on epistemology as well as logic, rhetoric, and linguistics. This paper shows how early Nyāya theorizing about argumentation, from Vātsyāyana to Jayanta Bhaṭṭa, can fruitfully be juxtaposed with the pragma-dialectic approach to argumentation pioneered by Frans van Eemeren. I illustrate the implications of this analysis with a case study from Jayanta Bhaṭṭa’s satirical play, Much Ado about Religion (Āgamaḍambara).

Two Theories of Motivation and Their Assessment by Jayanta

This article develops the discussion surrounding motivation and action in classical Indian philosophy through the lens afforded by the early Nyāya philosopher Jayanta Bhaṭṭa (c.10th cent. ce). Through his critique of prevailing theories of action in the Mīmāṃsā text tradition, theories that endeavor to explain how Vedic injunctions prompt their hearers to act, Jayanta: (1) provides a detailed exegesis of fundamental Mīmāṃsā doctrines such as bhāvanā and niyoga; (2) indicates how these theories fall short of explaining human motivation; and (3) gestures toward a possible account of motivation as embedded in a network of associations, psychological and physical, that not only condition and constrain motivation, but also shape our understanding of what constitutes an opportunity for action.