Sociology 2025 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Discuss

Q1

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) 'Textual perspective is important in understanding of Indian Social System.' Discuss. (10 marks) (b) Justify that the Indian traditions are modernizing. Also discuss its contributing factors. (10 marks) (c) According to you, which social reform movement has played the most effective role in uplifting the status of women? Explain. (10 marks) (d) How did Colonial Policies for the tribes affected their socio-economic conditions in India? Discuss. (10 marks) (e) How would you appropriate to characterise G. S. Ghurye as a practitioner of 'theoretical pluralism'? (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित प्रश्नों का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए : (a) 'भारतीय विद्या परिप्रेक्ष्य, भारतीय सामाजिक व्यवस्था को समझने में महत्वपूर्ण है।' विवेचना कीजिए । (10 अंक) (b) पुष्टि कीजिये कि भारतीय परम्पराओं का आधुनिकीकरण हो रहा है । इसमें योगदान करने वाले कारकों की भी विवेचना कीजिये । (10 अंक) (c) आपके अनुसार महिलाओं की स्थिति के उत्थान के लिए कौन से सामाजिक सुधार आंदोलन ने सबसे अधिक प्रभावशाली भूमिका का निर्वाह किया है ? व्याख्या कीजिए । (10 अंक) (d) औपनिवेशिक नीतियों ने भारत में जनजातियों की सामाजिक-आर्थिक दशाओं को किस प्रकार से प्रभावित किया था ? विवेचना कीजिए । (10 अंक) (e) आप जी. एस. घुर्ये को 'सैद्धान्तिक बहुलवाद' के प्रयोगकर्ता के रूप में किस प्रकार से उचित ठहरायेंगे । (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 Sociology 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 question demands 'discuss' across five sub-parts, requiring balanced treatment of each. Allocate ~30 words per sub-part (150 total), spending roughly equal time on each since all carry 10 marks. Structure: brief definitional opening for each, followed by two-sided argumentation with specific thinkers/examples, and a concise synthesis. For (a) engage Dumont-Srinivas debate; (b) use Yogendra Singh's modernization framework; (c) justify one movement with comparative edge; (d) apply Elwin vs. Hutton policy positions; (e) map Ghurye's eclectic method.

Key points expected

(a) Textual perspective: Dumont's 'Homo Hierarchicus' vs. Srinivas's field empiricism; sacred texts as ideological charter vs. lived practice
(b) Modernizing traditions: Sanskritization to Westernization to modernization; structural differentiation and secularization per Yogendra Singh
(c) Most effective women's reform: Brahmo Samaj (Rammohun Roy, sati abolition 1829) or Self-Respect Movement (Periyar, radical gender equality); justify with comparative criteria
(d) Colonial tribal policy: isolationist (Elwin) vs. assimilationist (Hutton/Ghurye); land alienation, forest acts, indentured labour, cultural disruption
(e) Ghurye's theoretical pluralism: indological + structural-functional + historical + ethnographic methods; 'Caste and Race in India' synthesis

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	10	For (a) treats 'discuss' as weighing textual vs. field perspectives; for (b) actively 'justifies' modernization claim with evaluative criteria; for (c) makes and defends a comparative judgment; for (d) and (e) sustains analytical tension rather than description—shows directive discipline across all five parts.	Recognizes 'discuss' and 'justify' but slips into listing facts; makes a choice in (c) without explicit comparative reasoning; uneven directive handling across parts.	Misreads directives—describes when asked to discuss, asserts when asked to justify, lists multiple movements in (c) without selecting one; treats all sub-parts identically regardless of directive.
Theoretical framing	20%	10	Deploys specific frameworks: Dumont/Srinivas debate (a), Yogendra Singh's modernization paradigm (b), feminist historiography or Ambedkarite framework (c), Elwin-Hutton policy typology (d), and precisely defines 'theoretical pluralism' via Ghurye's methodological writings (e)—all correctly applied.	Names theorists (Ghurye, Roy, Elwin) but uses frameworks loosely or as labels; conflates modernization with Westernization; vague on 'theoretical pluralism' meaning.	No theoretical anchors; answers read as general knowledge or opinion; misattributes concepts (e.g., calling Ghurye purely indological).
Indian / empirical examples	20%	10	Cites specific evidence: Manusmriti vs. village studies (a); census data on female literacy/education post-reform (b); specific legislation (Sati Abolition 1829, Age of Consent Act 1891, Hindu Code Bill) and organizational reach (c); Scheduled Districts Act 1874, Criminal Tribes Act, post-Independence displacement patterns (d); Ghurye's own field sites (Kolis, Sadhus) and publication corpus (e).	Mentions general trends ('women's education improved') or well-known acts without specificity; Ghurye mentioned without his specific works or methods.	No concrete Indian examples; generic statements ('tribes suffered') or anachronistic/global comparisons.
Multi-paradigm analysis	20%	10	Sustains dialectical tension throughout: textual vs. field (a), tradition-modernity as continuum vs. rupture (b), reformist vs. radical feminism in evaluating movements (c), protective vs. integrative policy outcomes (d), and evaluates both strengths (eclectic rigor) and limits (Hindu-centric bias) of Ghurye's pluralism (e).	Acknowledges one counter-position per sub-part but doesn't integrate; Ghurye critique mentioned superficially.	One-sided arguments; no engagement with criticism; presents Ghurye as unproblematic founder figure.
Conclusion & sociological imagination	20%	10	Each sub-part concludes with sociological synthesis: (a) texts as both resource and constraint; (b) modernization as selective adaptation; (c) criteria for 'effectiveness' made explicit; (d) colonial legacy in contemporary tribal policy; (e) Ghurye's relevance for decolonizing sociology—shows Millsian linkage of biography/history/structure.	Summarizes main points without analytical lift; conclusions read as restatements.	Missing or abrupt conclusions; no connective tissue between sub-parts; no demonstration of sociological imagination.

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 →