Question on method of arriving at conclusions

[Ian Goddard]

  At 01:50 PM 7/5/96 -0500, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
  >
  > I have a question on the method of coming to conclusions in advaita.
  > In my debate about the apaurusheyatva of the vedas with Shrisha Rao,
  > he claimed that vedantins accept "what cannot be disproved beyond
  > doubt as the truth". Does this method of analysis find acceptance
  > among advaitins?

IAN: Apart from stupidity or blind faith, what other methods for
acceptance of claims to truth than inability to disprove are there?

Based upon physical evidence, the dualists have not a leg to stand on.
Due to the mechanics of relational identity, not a single instance
of any separation can be identified in all of space and time.
Dualism -- where "dual" implies that A is free from ~A
-- is easily proven to be pure fallacy.


Law of Identity: A is A, relative to not-A. A = (A + ~A)

Law of Nonidentity: If there is 100% A, there is 0% A. A = ~A

absolute reality: http://www.erols.com/igoddard/reality.html