UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

The catuṣkoṭi (“four corners”) lists affirmation, negation, both and neither for a single proposition. Madhyamaka philosophers like Nāgārjuna use this fourfold to show that clinging to any one alternative leads to difficulty, revealing the limitations of fixed conceptual views. Considering all four helps point toward a middle way beyond such extremes.

Option A:
Option A correctly gives the standard four alternatives: “it is,” “it is not,” “it both is and is not,” and “it neither is nor is not.”

Option B:
Option B uses epistemic attitudes like “uncertain” and “meaningless,” which do not capture the classical catuṣkoṭi structure.

Option C:
Option C restricts the fourfold to a special case about permanence and impermanence; catuṣkoṭi is more general.

Option D:
Option D recasts the alternatives in terms of scriptural versus rational authority, which is not the traditional formulation.

The catuṣkoṭi, or four cornered alternative, is a classical Buddhist logical schema that exhausts the possibilities of affirmation, negation, both and neither regarding a proposition. It is used, especially in Madhyamaka, to show how clinging to any of these extremes leads to philosophical problems. By cycling through all four, the tradition illustrates the limits of conceptual thinking and points to a middle way beyond fixation on any one option.

Option A:
Option A reproduces the traditional pattern: affirmation, negation, both and neither, making it the standard formulation of catuṣkoṭi.

Option B:
Option B introduces modal language like “may be” that does not match the canonical fourfold structure.

Option C:
Option C focuses on epistemic attitudes (uncertain, meaningless) rather than the ontological and logical possibilities that catuṣkoṭi addresses.

Option D:
Option D restricts the schema to the special case of permanence versus impermanence, whereas catuṣkoṭi is a general logical form applicable to many propositions.