The correspondence theory of truth is one of the most widely accepted theories of truth in Indian logic. It states that the truth of a statement is determined by its correspondence to reality. In other words, a statement is true if it accurately describes the way things are in the world.

The coherence theory of truth is another widely accepted theory of truth in Indian logic. It states that the truth of a statement is determined by its coherence with other beliefs. In other words, a statement is true if it is consistent with our other beliefs and does not lead to any contradictions.

The pragmatic theory of truth is a theory of truth that is based on the idea that the truth of a statement is determined by its usefulness in practice. In other words, a statement is true if it is useful in helping us to achieve our goals or solve problems.

The Nyaya school of Indian logic is most closely associated with the correspondence theory of truth. Nyaya philosophers argue that the truth of a statement is determined by its correspondence to reality. They believe that the only way to know whether a statement is true is to compare it to the world and see if it accurately describes the way things are.

The Mimamsa school of Indian logic is most closely associated with the coherence theory of truth. Mimamsa philosophers argue that the truth of a statement is determined by its coherence with other beliefs. They believe that the only way to know whether a statement is true is to see if it is consistent with our other beliefs and does not lead to any contradictions.

The Vaisheshika school of Indian logic is most closely associated with the pragmatic theory of truth. Vaisheshika philosophers argue that the truth of a statement is determined by its usefulness in practice. They believe that the only way to know whether a statement is true is to see if it is useful in helping us to achieve our goals or solve problems.

The term 'pramana' is used in Indian logic to refer to the validity of an argument. Pramana is a Sanskrit word that means 'means of knowledge'. In Indian logic, a pramana is a method of reasoning that is considered to be reliable and trustworthy. There are six pramanas in Indian logic: perception, inference, comparison, testimony, postulation, and non-apprehension.

Hypothesis is not a pramana in Indian logic. The six pramanas in Indian logic are perception, inference, comparison, testimony, postulation, and non-apprehension. Hypothesis is a method of reasoning that is used to generate new ideas and theories, but it is not considered to be a reliable and trustworthy method of knowledge.

Inference is the pramana that is used to gain knowledge of objects that are not directly perceptible. Inference is a process of reasoning in which we use our knowledge of certain facts to arrive at a conclusion about something that we do not know. For example, we might use our knowledge of the fact that all swans are white to infer that a particular bird that we see is a swan, even though we cannot see the bird's color directly.

Comparison is the pramana that is used to gain knowledge of objects that are similar to objects that we have already experienced. Comparison is a process of reasoning in which we compare two objects and identify their similarities and differences. For example, we might compare a new car to a car that we already own to see how they are similar and different.

Testimony is the pramana that is used to gain knowledge of objects that are beyond the reach of our senses. Testimony is a process of reasoning in which we rely on the testimony of someone who has direct knowledge of the object in question. For example, we might rely on the testimony of a scientist to learn about the existence of atoms, even though we cannot see atoms directly.

Postulation is the pramana that is used to gain knowledge of objects that are not directly perceptible and cannot be inferred from other objects. Postulation is a process of reasoning in which we posit the existence of an object in order to explain a phenomenon that we observe. For example, we might posit the existence of a god to explain the existence of the universe.

Non-apprehension is the pramana that is used to gain knowledge of objects that are not directly perceptible, cannot be inferred from other objects, and cannot be posited. Non-apprehension is a process of reasoning in which we conclude that an object does not exist because we have no evidence to support its existence. For example, we might conclude that there are no unicorns because we have never seen a unicorn and there is no evidence to suggest that unicorns exist.

A correspondence theory of truth is a theory of truth that states that the truth of a statement is determined by its correspondence to reality. In other words, a statement is true if it accurately describes the way things are in the world.

A coherence theory of truth is a theory of truth that states that the truth of a statement is determined by its coherence with other beliefs. In other words, a statement is true if it is consistent with our other beliefs and does not lead to any contradictions.

A pragmatic theory of truth is a theory of truth that states that the truth of a statement is determined by its usefulness in practice. In other words, a statement is true if it is useful in helping us to achieve our goals or solve problems.