Published Paper Details:

One of the most common and difficult topic of philosophy is the problem of universals. According to Raja Ram Dravid, broadly we have two kinds of knowledge about things: sensuous and conceptual. Sensuous knowledge is the knowledge of sensation which presents a concrete and particular aspect, whereas conceptual knowledge is the knowledge of ideas, which is dependent upon knowing through the use of reason. There are mainly three views, namely, realism, nominalism and conceptualism. The Nya?ya-Vais?es?ika and Mi?ma?m?sa? schools advocate realism, they believe that both the particulars and the universals are objectively real. The doctrine of sa?ma?nya or ja?ti in Nya?ya-Vais?es?ika philosophy is the starting point of the controversy over universals in Indian Philosophy. The Nya?ya-Vais?es?ika takes realistic stand in its extreme form in formulating sa?ma?nya or ja?ti. According to the Nya?ya-Vais?es?ika, the external world reveals both diversity and unity. It holds that if there is no bond of unity among the things, then their comprehension would be beyond the reach of human intellect. Hence, the Nya?ya-Vais?es?ika gives the name sa?ma?nya or ja?ti to these common features. One can analyze that the theory of the universal as an objective reality is the basic tenet of the Nya?ya-Vais?es?ika realism. For them universals are eternal and independent common characters that inhere in all members of a class. Nya?ya claims that without universals no proper accounting can be given to natural classes. Again, without universals no proper account can be given, for laws of nature such as that heat expands bodies. The Nya?ya-Vais?es?ika explains the theory of universals from its pluralistic and realistic standpoint. They do not accept the universals at the cost of the particulars. The particulars are there, and they are united under the roof of the highest universal existence.