 Some Indologists like Professor John Cort have cautioned against giving undue importance to " intellectual ahiṃsā " as the basis of anekāntavāda . He points out that Jain monks have also used anekāntavāda and syādvāda as debating weapons to silence their critics and prove the validity of the Jain doctrine over others . According to Dundas , in Jain hands , this method of analysis became a fearsome weapon of philosophical polemic with which the doctrines of Hinduism and Buddhism could be pared down to their ideological bases of simple permanence and impermanence , respectively , and thus could be shown to be one @-@ pointed and inadequate as the overall interpretations of reality they purported to be . On the other hand , the many @-@ sided approach was claimed by the Jains to be immune from criticism since it did not present itself as a philosophical or dogmatic view . 
 Some Indologists like Professor John Cort <a href='been_done' title='1'><mark>have</mark></a> cautioned against giving undue importance to " intellectual ahiṃsā " as the basis of anekāntavāda . He <a href='uninflect' title='2'><mark>points</mark></a> out that Jain monks <a href='been_done' title='3'><mark>have</mark></a> also used anekāntavāda and syādvāda as debating weapons to silence their critics and prove the validity of the Jain doctrine over others . According to Dundas , in Jain hands , this method of analysis became a fearsome weapon of philosophical polemic with which the doctrines of Hinduism and Buddhism could be pared down to their ideological bases of simple permanence and impermanence , respectively , and thus could be shown to be one @-@ pointed and inadequate as the overall interpretations of reality they purported to be . On the other hand , the many @-@ sided approach was claimed by the Jains to be immune from criticism since it did not present itself as a philosophical or dogmatic view . 
Some Indologists like Professor John Cort done cautioned against giving undue importance to " intellectual ahiṃsā " as da basis of anekāntavāda . He point outt that Jain monks done also used anekāntavāda and syādvāda as debating weapons to silence their critics and prove tdavalidity of the Jain doctrine over others . According to Dundas , in Jain hands , dis method of analysis became a fearsome weapon of philosophical polemic w/ which thdaoctrines of Hinduism and Buddhism could be pared down to their ideological bases of simple permanence and impermanence , respectively , and thus could b shown to bbone @-@ pointed and inadequate as the overall interpretations of reality they purported to be . On thedaher hand , the many @-@ sided approach was claimed by the Jains to be immune from criticism since it did not present itself as a philosophical or dogmatic view .