General Studies 2022 GS Paper IV 20 marks 150 words Compulsory Critically evaluate

Q1

(a) Wisdom lies in knowing what to reckon with and what to overlook. An officer being engrossed with the periphery, ignoring the core issues before him, is not rare in the bureaucracy. Do you agree that such preoccupation of an administrator leads to travesty of justice to the cause of effective service delivery and good governance? Critically evaluate. (Answer in 150 words) 10 (b) Apart from intellectual competency and moral qualities, empathy and compassion are some of the other vital attributes that facilitate the civil servants to be more competent in tackling the crucial issues or taking critical decisions. Explain with suitable illustrations. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) बुद्धिमानी में निहित है कि किसका ध्यान रखा जाए और क्या अनदेखा किया जाए। नौकरशाही में अपने सामने के मुख्य मुद्दों को अनदेखा करते हुए परिधि में लीन रहने वाले अधिकारी दुर्लभ नहीं हैं। क्या आप इस बात से सहमत हैं कि प्रशासक की इस तरह की व्यस्तता प्रभावी सेवा वितरण और सुशासन की लक्ष्य-प्राप्ति की प्रक्रिया में न्याय की विडंबना है? विश्लेषणात्मक मूल्यांकन कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए) (b) बौद्धिक दक्षता और नैतिक गुणों के अलावा सहानुभूति और करुणा कुछ अन्य महत्वपूर्ण विशिष्ट्य हैं, जो सिविल सेवकों को निर्णायक मामलों को सुलझाने अथवा महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय लेने में अधिक सक्षम बनाते हैं। उपयुक्त उदाहरणों के साथ व्याख्या कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 General Studies questions

Directive word: Critically evaluate

This question asks you to critically evaluate. 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

Critically evaluate demands balanced judgment with evidence. For part (a), spend ~75 words examining how peripheral focus distorts justice and governance, using the 'core vs periphery' framework. For part (b), use remaining ~75 words explaining empathy's role in decision-making with concrete illustrations. Structure: brief intro acknowledging both dimensions → analytical body for (a) with counter-arguments → explanatory body for (b) with examples → synthesizing conclusion.

Key points expected

Part (a): Analysis of 'wisdom as selective attention' — distinguishing core issues (public welfare, systemic reform) from periphery (procedural formalism, political pressure)
Part (a): Critical evaluation of how peripheral engrossment causes travesty of justice — delayed services, elite capture, erosion of public trust in governance
Part (a): Nuanced counter — limited legitimate attention to periphery (legal compliance, stakeholder management) without losing core focus
Part (b): Explanation of empathy/compassion as distinct from intellectual/moral competence — emotional intelligence enabling contextual, humane decisions
Part (b): Illustrations showing empathy in action — disaster response (Kerala floods), welfare delivery (PMJAY beneficiary identification), conflict resolution (tribal land rights)
Synthesis: Wisdom and empathy as complementary — prioritization without losing human connection in administrative decisions

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	4	For (a), executes 'critically evaluate' with thesis-antithesis-synthesis structure, examining both how peripheral focus harms governance AND when periphery matters; for (b), 'explain' directive fulfilled through causal reasoning showing how empathy enables competence, not mere description	Addresses both parts but treats (a) as agree/disagree without genuine critical examination; (b) lists empathy attributes without explaining causal mechanism	Misreads directives — agrees/disagrees without evaluation in (a), describes empathy without explanation in (b); or conflates both parts into undifferentiated response
Content depth & accuracy	20%	4	Demonstrates conceptual precision: 'travesty of justice' linked to substantive vs procedural justice; empathy distinguished from sympathy; accurate reference to administrative behavior concepts (Parkinson's law, red-tapism) and emotional intelligence literature	Generally accurate but generic treatment — 'justice' and 'empathy' used without conceptual unpacking; conflates wisdom with knowledge, empathy with kindness	Factually confused or superficial — treats wisdom as mere experience, empathy as weakness; or introduces irrelevant concepts (spiritual wisdom, religious compassion without administrative relevance)
Structure & flow	20%	4	Clear demarcation between (a) and (b) with ~75 words each; (a) flows: thesis → evidence of harm → legitimate counter → balanced judgment; (b) flows: conceptual clarity → mechanism → illustrations; tight integration via 'wisdom-empathy' bridge in conclusion	Both parts addressed but uneven word allocation; some structural logic present but transitions weak; conclusion merely summarizes without synthesis	No visible structure — parts merged or sequence confused; abrupt shifts; missing or mechanical conclusion; significantly over/under word limit for either part
Examples / case-law / data	20%	4	For (a): Specific instances of peripheral focus harming delivery — Smart Cities Mission aesthetic focus over sanitation, or COVID-19 second wave oxygen data politics over supply; for (b): Precise illustrations — IAS officer Armstrong Pame's self-funded road (empathy-driven), or District Collector's night shelters during cold wave	Generic references — 'some officers focus on files not people' or 'Mother Teresa showed compassion' without administrative context; examples not tied to decision-making competence	No examples, or irrelevant/invented ones — personal anecdotes without institutional relevance, or foreign examples without Indian administrative applicability
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	4	Synthesizes both parts: wisdom (knowing what to prioritize) and empathy (knowing whom it affects) as integrated administrative virtue; forward-looking insight on 21st century governance — AI-assisted prioritization with human empathy; or reference to 2nd ARC on 'ethical governance'	Separate conclusions for each part without integration; or platitudinous closing — 'both are important for good governance' without analytical advancement	No conclusion, or abrupt ending; conclusion contradicts body; purely rhetorical flourish without substantive closure

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 →