[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Science, technology and education](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science) › [Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021) › c7.s1.4 # Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c7.s1.4 Vāda in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c7.s1.4 - **Language:** English ### [c7.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c7.s1.4) Of these, \*anumāna\* (inference) is crucial for sustaining any conversation or debate. It has three cases in relation to \*hetu\* (reason/cause) — \*pakṣa\*, \*sapakṣa\* and \*vipakṣa\*. \*Pakṣa\* is the thesis case, \*sapakṣa\* is the observed case in which \*hetu\* is essentially present, and \*vipakṣa\* another observed case in which \*hetu\* is essentially absent. Inference is employed in two ways — for the understanding of one’s own self and for the understanding of the other one (a disciple or an opponent in debate). The former is called \*svārthānumāna\* and the latter \*parārthānumāna\*. \*Pañcāvayava-vākya\* is required for \*parārthānumāna\*. The five \*avayavas\*, comprised in five statements, are \*pratijñā\* (thesis), \*hetu\* (reason), \*dṛṣṭānta\* or \*udāharaṇa\* (illustration), \*upanaya\* (application) and \*nigamana\* (conclusion). - [Previous: c7.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c7.s1.3) - [Next: c7.s1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c7.s1.5) - [Up: c7.s1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c7.s1) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c7.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.science.tripathi-2021.c7.s1.4) · Pramāṇa