Essay 2023 Essay Paper 125 marks 1200 words Discuss

Q2

Visionary decision-making happens at the intersection of intuition and logic.

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

दूरदर्शी निर्णय तभी लिए जाते हैं जब अंतर्ज्ञान और तर्क का परस्पर मेल होता है ।

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2023 Essay questions

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

Discuss demands a balanced exploration of how intuition and logic interact in visionary decision-making, not advocacy for one over the other. Structure: Introduction defining the intersection → Body examining domains where both operate (governance, science, business, ethics) with Indian and global examples → Analysis of tensions and synergies → Conclusion on cultivating this intersection for India's future challenges.

Key points expected

Definition of visionary decision-making distinguishing it from routine or reactive decision-making
Analysis of intuition (pattern recognition, experiential wisdom, emotional intelligence) and logic (data, rational frameworks, evidence-based reasoning) as complementary rather than opposing forces
Examination across multiple domains: policy (India's economic liberalization 1991), scientific research (ISRO's frugal engineering), business (Infosys founding), and social movements (Chipko, Narmada Bachao Andolan)
Discussion of cognitive biases that distort intuition and analysis paralysis from excessive logic, with safeguards needed
Contemporary relevance: AI-human collaboration, climate policy, pandemic response where data meets ethical judgment

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Thesis clarity	20%	25	Opens with a precise, arguable thesis that captures the dialectical relationship between intuition and logic; explicitly defines 'visionary' and 'intersection' without conflating the two faculties; maintains this tension throughout rather than collapsing into one-sided advocacy.	States a general position on decision-making but thesis remains vague on the intersection concept; definitions of intuition and logic are superficial or treated as synonyms; some drift toward favoring one element over the other.	No discernible thesis or central argument; treats intuition and logic as mutually exclusive alternatives; confuses visionary with merely successful or popular decisions.
Multi-dimensional coverage	20%	25	Covers minimum four distinct domains (e.g., governance, science, business, social movements) with explicit analysis of how the intuition-logic intersection operates differently in each; addresses philosophical, psychological, and practical dimensions; examines both individual and institutional decision-making.	Covers 2-3 domains with uneven depth; philosophical or psychological dimensions mentioned but not integrated; either individual genius or institutional process emphasized exclusively.	Single-domain treatment or repetitive examples; no engagement with how the intersection varies by context; ignores institutional or collective dimensions entirely.
Examples & evidence	20%	25	Minimum 4-5 specific, well-developed examples including Indian cases (e.g., Rao-Singh 1991 reforms, ISRO's Mars mission, Aravind Eye Care's McDonaldization of surgery) and 1-2 global comparators; each example explicitly analyzes both intuitive and logical elements, not just outcome success.	2-3 examples with thin description; Indian examples present but analysis of the intuition-logic dynamic is asserted rather than demonstrated; over-reliance on common cases (Gandhi, Nehru) without fresh insight.	Examples absent or purely generic (e.g., 'great leaders use both'); factual errors in case descriptions; examples contradict the thesis or illustrate only one element.
Language & flow	20%	25	Sophisticated vocabulary appropriate to philosophical and policy discourse; seamless transitions between abstract argument and concrete illustration; controlled sentence variety; no grammatical errors; effective use of connectives showing causal and comparative relationships.	Competent but occasionally imprecise vocabulary; some abrupt shifts between paragraphs; minor grammatical errors; functional but uninspired transitions; occasional redundancy.	Basic or inappropriate vocabulary; choppy paragraphing with no logical progression; frequent grammatical errors; excessive reliance on bullet-like listing; colloquialisms unsuited to formal essay.
Conclusion & forward look	20%	25	Synthesizes the tension rather than resolving it artificially; proposes concrete mechanisms for cultivating this intersection in Indian administrative and educational contexts; addresses contemporary challenges (AI governance, climate uncertainty) where this balance is urgently needed; ends with a memorable, thesis-reinforcing insight.	Restates main points without synthesis; generic recommendations for 'balance' or 'training'; forward look limited to platitudes about future leaders; conclusion feels detachable from body.	No conclusion or abrupt ending; introduces new arguments or examples; purely moralistic exhortation; conclusion contradicts thesis or ignores the intersection concept entirely.

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 →