Philosophy 2024 Paper I 50 marks Discuss

Q4

(a) What do the existentialist thinkers mean by the slogan "existence precedes essence" ? How is human existence related to human freedom according to them ? Discuss. 10+10 marks (b) Why does Husserl think that essences exhibit a kind of continuity between consciousness and being ? Discuss. 15 marks (c) Explain the nature of the two dogmas that Quine refers to in his paper 'Two Dogmas of Empiricism'. 15 marks

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) "अस्तित्व सार का पूर्वगामी है" इस आदर्श-वाक्य से अस्तित्ववादी विचारकों का क्या अर्थ है ? उनके अनुसार मानव सत्ता किस प्रकार मानव स्वातंत्र्य से संबंधित है ? विवेचना कीजिए। 10+10 अंक (b) हुसर्ल ऐसा क्यों सोचते हैं कि सार-तत्त्व, चेतना तथा सत्तु के बीच एक प्रकार की निरंतरता को प्रदर्शित करते हैं ? विवेचना कीजिए । 15 अंक (c) उन दो मतार्थों के स्वरूप की व्याख्या कीजिए जिनको क्वाइन अपने लेख 'टू डॉगमास ऑफ एम्पिरिसिज्म' में संदर्भित करते हैं । 15 अंक

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 Philosophy 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

The directive 'discuss' demands a balanced exposition with critical analysis across all three parts. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief introduction noting the trajectory from existentialism through phenomenology to analytic philosophy; then address each sub-part sequentially with internal coherence; conclude by reflecting on how these movements collectively transformed 20th-century philosophy's understanding of meaning, consciousness, and knowledge.

Key points expected

  • For (a): Explain 'existence precedes essence' as Sartre's formulation reversing the traditional metaphysical priority of essence over existence, with human beings first existing through thrownness (Heidegger) or facticity, then creating essence through choices and projects
  • For (a): Articulate the intrinsic connection between existence and freedom—freedom as the defining condition of human existence (Sartre's 'condemned to be free'), the burden of radical freedom, and authenticity through self-creation rather than bad faith
  • For (b): Explain Husserl's eidetic reduction and the intuition of essences (Wesensschau), showing how essences are neither merely subjective ideas nor mind-independent Platonic forms but constituted through intentional consciousness
  • For (b): Demonstrate the continuity thesis—consciousness as always consciousness-of, the noema-noesis correlation, and how phenomenological bracketing reveals essences as invariant structures of possible experience
  • For (c): Identify Dogma 1: the analytic-synthetic distinction (truths by meaning vs. truths by fact) and Dogma 2: reductionism—the belief that each meaningful statement can be translated into statements about immediate experience
  • For (c): Explain Quine's critique through holism and underdetermination of theory by data, the indeterminacy of translation, and the consequence that philosophy becomes continuous with empirical science

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precisely defines 'existence precedes essence' against Aristotelian/Thomistic essentialism; accurately captures Husserl's phenomenological method including epoché and eidetic intuition; correctly identifies both dogmas with Quine's exact terminology and understands the scope of his critiqueBasic grasp of existentialist freedom and essence-creation; general awareness of Husserl's essences as perceived; knows both dogmas by name but conflates or misstates their contentConfuses existence-essence priority with other philosophical doctrines; treats Husserl as idealist or realist without nuance; cannot distinguish the two dogmas or misattributes them to other philosophers
Argument structure20%10Each sub-part builds internally: for (a) moves from slogan explication to freedom analysis via authenticity/bad faith; for (b) progresses from method to continuity thesis; for (c) presents dogmas then systematic critique; clear transitions between parts showing philosophical developmentAddresses all sub-parts with some logical flow but uneven development; part (a) may list thinkers without integrating freedom analysis; part (b) describes method without reaching continuity claim; part (c) states dogmas without explaining Quine's argument against themDisjointed treatment with repetition across sub-parts; fails to connect existence-freedom relation in (a); describes Husserl's procedure without explaining why essences show continuity; lists dogmas without Quine's reasoning
Schools / thinkers cited20%10For (a): Sartre (primary source), Heidegger (thrownness, Geworfenheit), Kierkegaard (precursor), de Beauvoir (ambiguity); for (b): Husserl (Ideas I, Cartesian Meditations), with possible contrast to Brentano; for (c): Quine (1951 paper), with contextual reference to Carnap, logical positivism, and subsequent impact on Davidson/PutnamNames Sartre for (a), Husserl for (b), Quine for (c) with minimal elaboration; may mention Kierkegaard or Nietzsche vaguely for existentialism; recognizes logical positivism as target without specific figuresGeneric references like 'existentialists believe' without naming Sartre or Heidegger; conflates Husserl with Hegel; attributes dogmas to wrong philosophers or cannot locate Quine's paper historically
Counter-position handling20%10For (a): notes essentialist objections (Aquinas, Marxist critique of Sartre's radical freedom); for (b): addresses realist/idealist objections to phenomenological method, possibly citing Ricoeur or Derrida's critique of presence; for (c): presents Carnap's defense or Grice-Strawson response to Quine, then evaluates strengths of holismBriefly acknowledges alternative views without sustained engagement—mentions essentialism against (a), naive realism against (b), or notes that Quine was challenged without specifics; tends toward one-sided expositionNo awareness of opposition to any position; presents all three views as unproblematic truth; or introduces irrelevant critiques (e.g., religious objections to existentialism without philosophical grounding)
Conclusion & coherence20%10Synthesizes the three movements as responses to crisis of foundations in modern philosophy—existentialism's subjectivity, phenomenology's rigorous science of consciousness, and Quine's naturalized epistemology; reflects on contemporary relevance (e.g., AI ethics and intentionality, post-truth politics and relativism concerns); maintains thematic unity across 50 marksSummarizes each sub-part separately without integration; generic conclusion about philosophy's importance; no attempt to connect the three thinkers despite their shared 20th-century contextAbrupt ending or missing conclusion; or conclusion that contradicts earlier analysis; treats three parts as entirely unrelated questions without acknowledging their placement in Western philosophy paper

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 2024 Paper I