Philosophy 2023 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Critically examine

Q1

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) What is meant by justice as fairness? Explain Rawls' theory of justice. (10 marks) (b) Critically examine the anarchist's view that "all States always and everywhere are illegitimate and unjust." (10 marks) (c) Do you agree that the rights concerning land and property have empowered women? Discuss. (10 marks) (d) Critically examine the challenges faced by a multicultural society with reference to India. (10 marks) (e) If monarchs are above politics, can monarchy be a systematic form of government? Discuss. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए : (a) निष्पक्षता के रूप में न्याय से क्या अभिप्राय है ? रॉल्स के न्याय के सिद्धांत की व्याख्या कीजिए । (10 अंक) (b) अराजकतावादी के इस विचार का आलोचनात्मक परीक्षण कीजिए कि "सभी राज्य सदैव और सर्वत्र अवैध एवं अनुचित हैं ।" (10 अंक) (c) क्या आप इस बात से सहमत हैं कि भूमि और सम्पत्ति से सम्बद्ध अधिकारों ने महिलाओं को सशक्त किया है ? विवेचन कीजिए । (10 अंक) (d) भारत के संदर्भ में बहुसंस्कृतिवादी समाज के समक्ष उपस्थित चुनौतियों का आलोचनात्मक परीक्षण कीजिए । (10 अंक) (e) यदि राजा राजनीति से ऊपर है, तो क्या राजतंत्र शासन का एक सुव्यवस्थित रूप हो सकता है ? विवेचन कीजिए । (10 अंक)

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

Directive word: Critically examine

This question asks you to critically examine. 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 examine demands balanced analysis with evaluation of strengths and weaknesses. Allocate ~30 words per sub-part (150 words each, 10 marks each). For (a), define 'justice as fairness' and explain Rawls' two principles; for (b), present anarchist arguments (Bakunin, Kropotkin) then critique via social contract; for (c), present evidence (Hindu Succession Act 2005) with critical nuance; for (d), examine Indian multicultural challenges (language, religion, regionalism) with constitutional responses; for (e), analyze monarchy's claim of neutrality versus democratic accountability. Conclude each part with a balanced judgment.

Key points expected

  • (a) Justice as fairness: original position, veil of ignorance, two principles of justice (equal liberty, difference principle), priority of liberty over equality
  • (b) Anarchist critique: state as coercive monopoly, illegitimate authority; counter-arguments: state as enabler of rights, public goods, minimal state legitimacy (Nozick, Weber)
  • (c) Property rights empowerment: Hindu Succession Act 2005, joint ownership, economic autonomy; critical view: patriarchal resistance, implementation gaps, landlessness
  • (d) Indian multicultural challenges: linguistic reorganization, religious personal laws, regional aspirations, Article 29-30 protections; responses: composite culture, constitutional secularism
  • (e) Monarchy above politics: symbolic unity, continuity, non-partisanship; critique: democratic deficit, accountability vacuum, hereditary privilege, ceremonial role

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precise definitions: Rawls' original position and difference principle accurately stated; anarchism distinguished from libertarianism; property rights linked to Hindu Succession Act 2005; multiculturalism distinguished from pluralism; monarchy distinguished from absolute/constitutional variantsBasic definitions present but conflates key terms (e.g., justice as fairness with utilitarianism); vague on anarchist varieties; incomplete on legal provisionsMisidentifies core concepts (e.g., confuses Rawls with Nozick); treats anarchism as chaos; conflates monarchy with dictatorship
Argument structure20%10Each 150-word segment follows thesis-antithesis-synthesis; clear signposting between descriptive and critical elements; proportional weight to explanation versus evaluationDescriptive-heavy with weak critical transition; some parts lack internal structure; uneven development across five segmentsRambling narrative without argumentative spine; pure description or pure assertion; severe imbalance across sub-parts
Schools / thinkers cited20%10Rawls (Theory of Justice), Bakunin/Kropotkin (anarchism), Nozick/Weber (state legitimacy), Amartya Sen (capabilities critique of property rights), Madan/Parekh (multiculturalism), Bagehot (dignified versus efficient constitution)Mentions Rawls and anarchists generically; no Indian thinkers on multiculturalism; omits constitutional theorists on monarchyNo named philosophers; vague references ('some thinkers say'); anachronistic or invented attributions
Counter-position handling20%10(a) Addresses libertarian and communitarian critiques of Rawls; (b) Engages with philosophical anarchism versus political anarchism distinction; (c) Balances legal empowerment with socio-cultural barriers; (d) Presents both multicultural accommodation and majoritarian assimilationist pressures; (e) Weighs monarchy's stabilizing function against democratic legitimacy requirementsSuperficial nod to opposing view without substantive engagement; one-sided presentation in 2-3 sub-partsNo counter-arguments presented; strawman dismissal of alternatives; purely advocacy-based answers
Conclusion & coherence20%10Each sub-part ends with nuanced synthesis (e.g., Rawlsian justice as workable ideal despite implementation challenges; conditional state legitimacy; property rights as necessary but insufficient for gender equality; Indian multiculturalism as evolving equilibrium; monarchy as systemically limited); cross-thematic awareness of justice linking all five partsGeneric concluding sentences without specific judgment; weak thematic integration across five disparate topicsAbrupt endings without conclusion; contradictory positions across sub-parts; missing conclusions for 2+ segments

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 Philosophy 2023 Paper II