From Wiki( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_H._H._Ingalls,_Sr ):

Daniel Henry Holmes Ingalls, Sr. (4 May 1916 – 17 July 1999) was the Wales Professor of Sanskrit at Harvard University.

Ingalls was born in New York City and raised in Virginia. He received his A.B. in 1936, at Harvard majoring in Greek and Latin. and his A.M. in 1938 studying symbolic logic under Willard Van Orman Quine.

He was appointed a junior fellow in the Harvard Society of Fellows in 1939 after which he set off for Calcutta for the study of Navya-Nyāya[n 1] logic with Kalipada Tarkacharya (1938-1941).

His fellowship was interrupted by the Second World War during which he served as an Army code breaker decoding Japanese radio messages for the Office of Strategic Services (1942–44).

After the war, Ingalls returned to Harvard as Wales Professor of Sanskrit. He was particularly known for his translation and commentary in An Anthology of Sanskrit Court Poetry, which contains some 1,700 Sanskrit verses collected by a Buddhist abbot, Vidyākara, in Bengal around AD 1050. Ingalls was a student of the Indian grammarian Shivram Dattatray Joshi, and the teacher of many famous students of Sanskrit, such as Wendy Doniger, Diana Eck, John Stratton Hawley, Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson, Robert Thurman, Sheldon Pollock, Indira Viswanathan Peterson, and Gary Tubb. He was renowned for the rigor of his introductory Sanskrit course. He was the editor of the Harvard Oriental Series from 1950 to 1983.

Ingalls was the father of the computer scientist Dan Ingalls and the author Rachel Ingalls.

He was also chairman of the department of Sanskrit and Indian studies and president of the American Oriental Society.

First Published 1951

First Indian Reprint: Delhi, 1988

The study of Navya-nyäya needs no apology to an Indianist. A great part of

Indian philosophy since the thirteenth century is unintelligible without it. But

more than this, I believe there is much in Navya-nyäya that will also prove of

interest to the general student of philosophy and logic. I shall enumerate some

points which I consider to be of such general interest, adding in parentheses references

to Section II where these points are discussed in detail. First, I must admit

that the list and the judgments it contains are preliminary. A general evaluation

of this system of logic cannot be made until many more of its texts are translated

and explained.

...

There are a number of points where Navya-nyäya appears definitely superior

to Aristotelian logic. Among these are its understanding of conjunction, alternation,

and their negates (§§ 35, 36), and of the class corollary of De Morgan's law

(§38). Navya-nyäya never confuses the attribute of a class with the attribute of

its members (§ 50). In its concept of number it seems to anticipate mathematical

logic by several centuries (§51).