Indian logic is a tradition separate from western formal logic. It is a
non-monotonic method of default reasoning similar to inference to the best
explanation, but with a recipe of five steps:

1. thesis
2. reason
3. example
4. application
5. conclusion

Three rules for correct probans (arguments) are followed by all Indian
traditions. They are not formal fallacies but would produce pseudo-reasons if
not restricted:

1. Thing to be inferred is present in subject of inference
2. And present in at least one place where conclusion holds
3. And absent wherever conclusion is absent

These rules guarantee that a connection is not accidental. Two further rules
are for counterbalance and counterexamples, recognised by some traditions.

Contrary to logic in the West, Indian logic is not connected to proof and
mathematics. Rather it is always a part of epistemology, linguistics, dialogue,
&c. As it does not deal in tautologies it is not recognised as a logic by proof
theorists. Something unique about Indian logic is that it has no split between
syntax and semantics, thus the notions of soundness and validity can not be
separated. Furthermore it allows inference to be studied psychologically as
the process of analogy-making.

Word-count: 198
Andreas van Cranenburgh 0440949.