Anthropology 2025 Paper I 50 marks Discuss

Q8

(a) How the theories of postmodernism are relevant in promoting social justice and empowerment of marginalised communities? (20 marks) (b) 'Genome-wide Disease Association Studies (GWAS) advanced our understanding of health and disease.' Discuss. (15 marks) (c) Examine the utility of human remains in forensic analysis. Discuss the facial reconstruction technique. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) उत्तर आधुनिकता के सिद्धांत सामाजिक न्याय को बढ़ावा देने और हाशिये पर खड़े समुदायों के सशक्तिकरण में कैसे प्रासंगिक हैं ? (20 अंक) (b) 'जीनोम-व्यापी रोग संबंध अध्ययन (GWAS) स्वास्थ्य एवं रोगों पर हमारी समझ विकसित करते हैं।' विवेचना कीजिए। (15 अंक) (c) फोरेंसिक विश्लेषण में मानव अवशेषों की उपयोगिता का परीक्षण कीजिए। चेहरा पुनर्निर्माण तकनीकी की विवेचना कीजिए। (15 अंक)

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'discuss' demands a balanced, analytical treatment with critical engagement. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief introduction linking the three themes under anthropology's applied turn; body addressing each part sequentially with clear sub-headings; conclusion synthesizing how these diverse approaches collectively advance inclusive, evidence-based policy and justice.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Postmodernist theories (Lyotard's incredulity toward metanarratives, Foucault's power/knowledge, Derrida's deconstruction) and their application to subaltern voices, indigenous rights, and decolonizing anthropology; critique of universalism and grand theory in development discourse
  • Part (a): Specific mechanisms—participatory action research, collaborative ethnography, reflexivity, and positionality—through which postmodernism enables empowerment of Dalits, Adivasis, and marginalized groups in Indian context
  • Part (b): GWAS methodology (SNP arrays, case-control designs, population stratification correction) and its contributions to understanding polygenic diseases, pharmacogenomics, and precision medicine; limitations including 'missing heritability' and Eurocentric bias
  • Part (c): Utility of human remains in forensic anthropology—estimation of biological profile (age, sex, ancestry, stature), trauma analysis, PMI determination, and individual identification; medico-legal significance in disaster victim identification and criminal cases
  • Part (c): Facial reconstruction techniques—anthropometric methods (Gerasimov, American method), computerized 3D modeling, and DNA phenotyping; applications in unidentified remains cases including Indian examples like the Purulia skull case or Tsunami victim identification

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Accurately defines postmodernist thinkers (Lyotard, Foucault, Derrida) and their specific relevance to social justice; correctly explains GWAS methodology including SNPs, linkage disequilibrium, and population stratification; precisely describes forensic techniques—anthropometric landmarks, tissue depth markers, and 3D reconstruction softwareBasic familiarity with postmodernism as 'relativism' without thinker specificity; superficial GWAS description as 'genetic study'; vague mention of 'facial reconstruction' without methodological detailConfuses postmodernism with post-structuralism or Marxism; describes GWAS as 'genome sequencing' or confuses with whole-genome sequencing; conflates facial reconstruction with artistic portraiture or DNA fingerprinting
Theoretical framing20%10For (a), demonstrates how postmodernism critiques positivist anthropology and enables subaltern studies (Spivak, Guha); for (b), situates GWAS within evolutionary medicine and critiques of genetic determinism; for (c), connects forensic anthropology to biological anthropology's theoretical foundations in osteology and population variationLists theories without showing interconnections; treats GWAS as purely technical without theoretical embedding; describes forensic methods without disciplinary contextNo theoretical framework; random assortment of concepts; or complete misattribution (e.g., attributing GWAS to Watson-Crick model)
Ethnographic / Indian examples20%10For (a): cites Indian postmodern ethnographies (e.g., Veena Das's work on violence, Ramnarayan Rawat on Chamars) or NGO-led participatory research with Adivasi communities; for (b): references Indian GWAS initiatives (CSIR-IGIB, GenomeIndia Project) and disease-specific studies (type 2 diabetes, leprosy); for (c): mentions CFSL Hyderabad, AIIMS forensic unit, or specific cases like the Nithari killings or 2004 Tsunami victim identificationGeneric mention of 'tribal communities' or 'Indian population' without specificity; no Indian GWAS examples; foreign case studies for forensic anthropologyNo Indian examples; or factually incorrect examples (e.g., citing non-existent Indian GWAS databases)
Comparative analysis20%10For (a): contrasts postmodern approaches with structural-functionalism and Marxist anthropology in addressing marginalization; for (b): compares GWAS with candidate gene studies and family-based linkage analysis; for (c): evaluates manual vs. computer-assisted reconstruction, or compares forensic utility across skeletal, dental, and DNA evidenceSimple listing without comparison; or superficial 'pros and cons' without analytical depthNo comparative element; or false comparisons (e.g., comparing postmodernism with GWAS directly)
Conclusion & applied angle20%10Synthesizes how postmodern reflexivity, genomic precision, and forensic identification collectively serve justice—linking epistemic justice (participatory knowledge production), health equity (diverse genomic representation), and legal justice (victim identification); addresses limitations (postmodernism's political inefficacy, GWAS's Eurocentric bias, forensic reconstruction's admissibility challenges) and suggests policy integrationSummarizes each part separately without synthesis; generic conclusion on 'importance of anthropology'No conclusion; or abrupt ending; or conclusion contradicting body content

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from Anthropology 2025 Paper I