Eastern philosophical opponents -For buddhists follow the atheistic and materialistic philosophy is for them to follow the doctrine of the annihilation of Cārvāka Muni, atheists do not have the whole truth. -Follow the doctrine of Sanjaya Belathaputta (agnostic) is to follow the doctrine they call "twisting of eels". Teachings are evasive. -Sanjaya Belathaputta disagrees with the doctrines of Carvaka and Buddhist, buddhist can not present evidence carvakas can not check their arguments for lack of evidence. Carvakâs take a position of denial for lack of evidence, it should be assumed that carvakas have total knowledge, but unknown, seem unreliable. -Carvakâs (atheists) destroy the buddhist teachings atheists as applied inference and the weight of strong evidence, the buddhist teachings do not support the weight of the evidence therefore buddhists are refuted. -Jayarasi Battha dealer to the most extreme skepticism school and transgressive Cārvāka declare the philosophical school that none can affirm their view of reality and wisdom, none can be given by some including the school of extreme materialism Cārvāka. Jayarasi argues: The establishment of conclusions (perception, inference and testimony) and proves that none of them are sufficient to establish the wisdom. The implication Is that inductive reasoning can not be seen as a universal premise. The testimony requires the reliability of the source or witness, que the pramana must be validated by another person. Even direct perception can not tell the truth requires that perception is not wrong or illusory, something that can not be established. Carvakas can not refute the karma, rebirth, life after death, the existence of gods if Jayarasi logic applies, but does not mean it exists, there is no proof. Atheists can apply inference and ignore metaphysical questions.
Posted on: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 19:44:54 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015