UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Traditional Nyāya presents inference with five avayavas: thesis, reason, example, application and conclusion. This makes the inferential structure, illustration and application to the subject explicit, especially in parārthānumāna. By contrast, the standard Western syllogism is typically compressed into two premises and a conclusion, omitting separate steps for example and application. This difference in explicitness and number of steps is often highlighted in comparative studies of logic.

Option A:
Option A is false because Nyāya does have a middle term (hetu), analogous to the Western middle term; both systems rely on a mediating concept.

Option B:
Option B accurately notes that Nyāya traditionally employs a five membered verbal form, while Western syllogism uses a three proposition structure.

Option C:
Option C misdescribes both traditions historically; each began with verbal formulations long before later symbolic notation.

Option D:
Option D incorrectly claims that Nyāya avoids universals; in fact, universal statements are crucial for vyāpti and for many of its premises.