10 Days to Mains: Don’t Be Intimidated. Be Inspired. By Anudeep Durishetty AIR 1 CSE 2017 CGP 2019 Admission Test | Details Writing a good Essay in UPSC Mains, Explained by Anudeep Durishetty
Current Affairs 2019
We are commencing with the second batch of Current Affairs + Answer Writing from 16th September. Attend the first class free on Sunday, 16th September at 11AM, New Delhi. Click here to know more and register. Click here for details.
MITRA'S IAS - Fresh New batches of PHILOSOPHY from: 27th SEPT(Evening) - 5pm
& 9th OCT (Morning) – 11 am

For more information call us at - Tel. No :- 01145505509, Mob. No-8826469839, 9560928172 or
Mail us at :- mitrasiasclasses@gmail.com
,Website:- www.mitrasias.com

Philosophy mains discussion and answer writing thread

edited October 2014 in Philosophy
Nobody can stop a thread whose time has come. Calling all closet philosophers!! Time to throw those manuscripts of philosophers long dead. Dust off your keyboards, cast off those insecurities about someone stealing your utopian answers and start contributing.

If you feel somebody(at least one person) deserves to blow the lid off the roof this year with philo in mains, post questions(from past year papers or otherwise) and suggest answers(if u are running short on time, just suggest a few broad points.) The goal is to explore a topic from varied angles

Posting a question just to set the ball rolling.-

“ Secularism in Indian context is not a rejection of religion but
fellowship of religions.” Discuss.(20 Marks, 2012)
«1345678

Comments

  • edited September 2014
    “ Secularism in Indian context is not a rejection of religion but
    fellowship of religions.” Discuss

    Ans-280 words
    The concept of secularism in Indian context is a peculiar case very different from the traditional western concept. Whereas, the Indian secularism envisages the equal respect to all the religions, the western concept stresses on the separation of the religion with the state politics. The concept of " Sarva dharma sama bhava" was also propounded by the Mahatma Gandhi. There is no such thing as an official state religion. the philosophy behind it is that being a multi-religious country the development of individuals can occur
    only if the state gives an all out support to their religion without discrimination and promote religious harmony between followers of different religions.
    Secularism finds mention in the Preamble of the constitution and is also its basic feature i.e it is subject to the judicial review.The government is therefore obliged to give equal respect to all the religions of the country. Safeguards in the form of Fundamental Rights have been incorporated in the constitution under article 25,26,27,28. These rights guarantee freedom of religion to individuals to profess, practice, propagate their religion. These rights cannot be abridged or taken away except in some abnormal circumstances. The state cannot compel the citizens to pay taxes for the promotion of any religion nor can any state run institution impart religious instructions. Since India is a country of diverse religions there is also protection for the religious minorities under article 29,30 of the Fundamental rights. Hence, minorities can establish and administer religious institutions for preservation and development of their religion. However in matters of grant-in-aid the state will not discriminate on the basis of fact that an institution is administered by a minority sect.
  • Question:
    1. Why did Kautilya think that sovereignty is hierarchical? Explain.
    2. Does Bodin concept of Sovereignty 'float in air'? Critically Examine.
  • “ Secularism in Indian context is not a rejection of religion but
    fellowship of religions.” Discuss

    Ans-280 words
    The concept of secularism in Indian context is a peculiar case very different from the traditional western concept. Whereas, the Indian secularism envisages the equal respect to all the religions, the western concept stresses on the separation of the religion with the state politics. The concept of " Sarva dharma sama bhava" was also propounded by the Mahatma Gandhi. There is no such thing as an official state religion. the philosophy behind it is that being a multi-religious country the development of individuals can occur
    only if the state gives an all out support to their religion without discrimination and promote religious harmony between followers of different religions.
    Secularism finds mention in the Preamble of the constitution and is also its basic feature i.e it is subject to the judicial review.The government is therefore obliged to give equal respect to all the religions of the country. Safeguards in the form of Fundamental Rights have been incorporated in the constitution under article 25,26,27,28. These rights guarantee freedom of religion to individuals to profess, practice, propagate their religion. These rights cannot be abridged or taken away except in some abnormal circumstances. The state cannot compel the citizens to pay taxes for the promotion of any religion nor can any state run institution impart religious instructions. Since India is a country of diverse religions there is also protection for the religious minorities under article 29,30 of the Fundamental rights. Hence, minorities can establish and administer religious institutions for preservation and development of their religion. However in matters of grant-in-aid the state will not discriminate on the basis of fact that an institution is administered by a minority sect.
    Fantastic that you contributed. Good attempt!! Just to throw in my two bits.

    U may mention - In India, though there isn't a complete separation of the state from religion, the state maintains a principled distance from religion. In certain cases however, State intervention in religious matters maybe necessary at times to uphold democratic principles eg. abolition of untouchability was necessary to ensure equality.

    Secondly, I feel it's important to mention that the uniform civil code remains an ideal to be realised(Directive principle under art 44)since Indian secularism leaves room for separate religious laws when it comes to certain affairs such as marriage. eg. separate marriage law for Muslims
  • “ Secularism in Indian context is not a rejection of religion but
    fellowship of religions.” Discuss

    Ans-280 words
    The concept of secularism in Indian context is a peculiar case very different from the traditional western concept. Whereas, the Indian secularism envisages the equal respect to all the religions, the western concept stresses on the separation of the religion with the state politics. The concept of " Sarva dharma sama bhava" was also propounded by the Mahatma Gandhi. There is no such thing as an official state religion. the philosophy behind it is that being a multi-religious country the development of individuals can occur
    only if the state gives an all out support to their religion without discrimination and promote religious harmony between followers of different religions.
    Secularism finds mention in the Preamble of the constitution and is also its basic feature i.e it is subject to the judicial review.The government is therefore obliged to give equal respect to all the religions of the country. Safeguards in the form of Fundamental Rights have been incorporated in the constitution under article 25,26,27,28. These rights guarantee freedom of religion to individuals to profess, practice, propagate their religion. These rights cannot be abridged or taken away except in some abnormal circumstances. The state cannot compel the citizens to pay taxes for the promotion of any religion nor can any state run institution impart religious instructions. Since India is a country of diverse religions there is also protection for the religious minorities under article 29,30 of the Fundamental rights. Hence, minorities can establish and administer religious institutions for preservation and development of their religion. However in matters of grant-in-aid the state will not discriminate on the basis of fact that an institution is administered by a minority sect.
    Fantastic that you contributed. Good attempt!! Just to throw in my two bits.

    U may mention - In India, though there isn't a complete separation of the state from religion, the state maintains a principled distance from religion. In certain cases however, State intervention in religious matters maybe necessary at times to uphold democratic principles eg. abolition of untouchability was necessary to ensure equality.

    Secondly, I feel it's important to mention that the uniform civil code remains an ideal to be realised(Directive principle under art 44)since Indian secularism leaves room for separate religious laws when it comes to certain affairs such as marriage. eg. separate marriage law for Muslims

    Tnx fr d review ...Regarding your first point, since untouchability is not related to religion there is no need to mention it here but yes i could have written" State intervention in religious matters maybe necessary at times to uphold democratic principles "
    Fully agree with the 2nd point..i missed this point. thnx :)

  • Can anybody explain LINGUISTIC THEORY OF NECESSARY PROPOSITION in LP ..?..I could not understand it
  • @Loserno_1 Untouchability(even if it was an aberration) unfortunately came to be associated with the Hindu religion so the point stands valid.
  • Thanks Shreyaa for this thread. I have philosophy optional. Though i am not making through prelims this year ( Got 196-200 :-(( )but will try to contribute and also will clear my concepts .
    :)
  • edited September 2014
    @shreyaa untouchability was within hinduism nt between religion like muslims or other were nt deemed as untouchable...thats y i said... neways...i posted two questions...do u mind answerin any of them... :)
  • Good to see this thread! I should be contributing in soon with some question/ answers... But keep it alive people...

    Promoter @ Civilsdaily's android app | To be human is to be curious, childlike, complex and immoral.
  • @shreyaa untouchability was within hinduism nt between religion like muslims or other were nt deemed as untouchable...thats y i said... neways...i posted two questions...do u mind answerin any of them... :)
    The example was meant to illustrate state intervention in a religious matter. Wasn't referring to any inter-religious aspect

  • Thanks Shreyaa for this thread. I have philosophy optional. Though i am not making through prelims this year ( Got 196-200 :-(( )but will try to contribute and also will clear my concepts .
    :)
    I am in the same boat as u.. getting ard abt the same..rest all depends on the UPSC key..Keep preparing..It ain't over until the fat lady(UPSC) sings :)
  • Good to see this thread! I should be contributing in soon with some question/ answers... But keep it alive people...

    Great

  • edited September 2014
    One of the major reasons why such initiatives don't help is because answers posted here would have been written at leisure with a good deal of thinking and arranging along with at least a few corrections. This is obvious because no one (including me) has the courage to put up an embarrassing answer here, something that we are forced to do in the actual paper. In exams, the quality of answers is generally much poorer and length much shorter than what you would see here. In fact, if one can reproduce the above answer on secularism in the real exam, he/she would score extremely high. Moreover, writing one answer in 7 mins and doing that continuously for 3 hours are entirely different things. After writing a few tests myself, I have realized that a great paper is not one composed of great answers, it is composed of a continous mix of average and above average answers with minimum possible horrible attempts. Writing ideal answers is a myth that draws people towards working on something which is pretty much useless from the examination perspective.

    Note: Just my opinion
    I don't like to reply to idiots and if you think I am referring to you, you are probably correct.
  • @woman
    Thanks for your valuable input. I totally agree with you that no one can produce such quality answers in the exam under pressure. But what choice do we have. At least it can keep us on track for structuring an answer and also i think its better to write on paper rather than on computer so that no chance of any editing.
    Answer writing can not guarantee quality answers( content wise ) in exam it can only help to frame answers fast in exam and to structure them properly.
    Thanks just my opinion .
  • One of the major reasons why such initiatives don't help is because answers posted here would have been written at leisure with a good deal of thinking and arranging along with at least a few corrections. This is obvious because no one (including me) has the courage to put up an embarrassing answer here, something that we are forced to do in the actual paper. In exams, the quality of answers is generally much poorer and length much shorter than what you would see here. In fact, if one can reproduce the above answer on secularism in the real exam, he/she would score extremely high. Moreover, writing one answer in 7 mins and doing that continuously for 3 hours are entirely different things. After writing a few tests myself, I have realized that a great paper is not one composed of great answers, it is composed of a continous mix of average and above average answers with minimum possible horrible attempts. Writing ideal answers is a myth that draws people towards working on something which is pretty much useless from the examination perspective.

    Note: Just my opinion
    Writing even if it is laboured forces you to think deeper on an issue than you normally would. I agree this exam leaves little time to think in the exam hall but an issue elaborated upon beforehand is likely to pop up faster in your head during exam conditions(what you elaborate upon is more likely to go into the long term memory). The whole exercise might just take the quality of your answers a small notch higher or help you throw light on an issue faster. You can always drop in to discuss a topic after you've revised it simply to get those neurons firing.

  • One of the major reasons why such initiatives don't help is because answers posted here would have been written at leisure with a good deal of thinking and arranging along with at least a few corrections. This is obvious because no one (including me) has the courage to put up an embarrassing answer here, something that we are forced to do in the actual paper. In exams, the quality of answers is generally much poorer and length much shorter than what you would see here. In fact, if one can reproduce the above answer on secularism in the real exam, he/she would score extremely high. Moreover, writing one answer in 7 mins and doing that continuously for 3 hours are entirely different things. After writing a few tests myself, I have realized that a great paper is not one composed of great answers, it is composed of a continous mix of average and above average answers with minimum possible horrible attempts. Writing ideal answers is a myth that draws people towards working on something which is pretty much useless from the examination perspective.

    Note: Just my opinion
    Writing even if it is laboured forces you to think deeper on an issue than you normally would. I agree this exam leaves little time to think in the exam hall but an issue elaborated upon beforehand is likely to pop up faster in your head during exam conditions(what you elaborate upon is more likely to go into the long term memory). The whole exercise might just take the quality of your answers a small notch higher or help you throw light on an issue faster. You can always drop in to discuss a topic after you've revised it simply to get those neurons firing.

    @woman What i did before writing that secularism answer was that i quickly revised secularism and then wrote it in real time of not more than 10-12 minutes. I would have loved to write it in on a piece of paper rather than typing but the option to upload the same is not available ova here...i still dont think its a quality perfect answer...many points i realised could have been put in and the answer could have been a made little crisper... there is no point of writing an nonspontaneous answer over here...whatever the topic be...one can revise and then answer the answer according to his understanding of the topic...

    @shreyaa I have a hunch that you have excellent writing skills..would like to see you framing an answer or two...!! :)
  • edited September 2014
    @woman @shreyaa btw, this question was asked in my uppcs exam...so i remembered a lot from there esp the polity part. This shows when you write an answer spontaneously v tend to remember n recall a major part of it n reproduce a large chunk of it should it pop up again..

    @all Questions:
    1) Why did Descartes gave his method of doubt and is Descartes successful in his attempt?
    2) Why did Kautilya think that sovereignty is hierarchical? Explain.(Repeat)
    3) Does Bodin concept of Sovereignty 'float in air'? Critically Examine.(Repeat)
    4) Is Democratic Socialism a contradictory doctrine??
  • i think what can be done is we can post our ans point wise here.... i mean we can / should only mention the keywords and point which shouldn't be miss regarding that topic...if we can do that for next three months i think it will suffice....
    i have my grade b mains on 13 and 14... so i will start contributing after that... tc everyone till then
    ( i didnt score well in paper 2 last time so i am hoping it can help me bridge the gap )
  • @all
    How to get A hundred years of Philosophy by John Passmore? or any good source for contemporary western philosophers?
    pre - 2, mains - 1*
  • for those who appear 2015 wth philosophy .... plss help

    http://forumias.com/discussion/5395/philosophy-2015
  • @Chomuphilosopher U won't find it for free. You can cover contemporary western perfectly well by using the net. Check out - Routledge, Stanford and Internet encyclopaedia of philo or just google those select topics to gain more depth/bread.
  • frnds need help i am totally new ... can i start preparing frm paper 2 - socio-political section 1st ???

    need help plss suggest me how to strt i am preparing fr 2015
  • edited September 2014
    Can anybody explain LINGUISTIC THEORY OF NECESSARY PROPOSITION in LP ..?..I could not understand it
    ok i m gonna try ...
    first this is theory by logical positivists. They were empirist, that is, they belived that true knowledge is possible through experience.
    Means fire burns we know by sense experince, table has four leg, sky is blue. All these are true by experince and can be called significant propositions because they give us knowledge about world.
    Non-sensical propositions are those which could not be verified. ex: god exists, or .. god does not exist.
    So first point is logical positivists called those propositions significant that are verifable through sense experience.

    Now secondly, how to verify if proposition true by sense experience ? ... these ways are .. verfiable in practise, in theory, strong sense, weak sense, directly, indirectly.
    read verification theory of meaning for details on verification of significant propositions.

    Now thirdly... there is a small twist, a kind of propositions called analytic propositions are true but they cant be known by sense experience. These are called necessary propositions and do not depend on sense experience for their validity.

    Here, Analytical propositions = necessary propositions
    Now what are analytical propositions exactly? read them under descrates and kant.

    Fourthly, if analytic propositions cant be verified by sense experience why they are necessary truths. what is basis? .... basis for there necessity is meaning .. ex. "all bachelors are unmarried male adults" ... this proposition is true because it says meaning of bachelor only ... no need of sense experience ... on the other hand "rose is red" require visibilty verification so this is not necessary proposition.

    so, to explain neccessity of analytical proposition on basis of meaning of language logical positivists formulated theory of necessary propositions.
    Analytical propositions are also thus significant ,.but empirists tool , the sense experience cant verify them. so logical positivists used logical of meaning language.

    I hope now if you read the theory it will make sense to you.
    @all Anywhere if i am wrong please correct me .
  • @Himanshum lucid explanation...very good
  • @all thanks for starting this thread. Kindly start philosophy answer writing thread on insightias also.
  • @shreyaa please post some questions from vision ias test series if u hv joined it
  • correction:
    Analytical propositions are also thus significant ,.but empirists tool , the sense experience cant verify them. so logical positivists used logical meaning of language.


  • @all please advice what should I follow for western philo ? I read pitanjali western philo printed notes but didnot find them that good.kindly suggest bwt mitra printed notes or vision I as philosophy printed notes.
    Please suggest asap.
  • edited September 2014
    @oastm vision ias seems to have been compiled as value addition material..They seem ok for answer writing..Don't know how mitra is..He used to dictate stuff from different books..vajiram is also good but dunno where u can get em
Sign In or Join to comment.

Welcome!

We are a secret self-moderated community for Civil Services preparation. Feel free to join, start a discussion, answer a question or just to say Thank you.

Just dont spread the word ;)

Sign in or join with Facebook or Google

Subscribe to ForumIAS Blog