Deleted
I have interpreted and wrote the answer from the perspective of India as the word used was "states" and not "States"
I have written the essay as I was aware of the quote of Heraclitus (Thank you to philo optional)and the way he intended it. But i dont think they will simply strike off an essay just for the simple reason of being interpreted in a way that was different from the original intention of the quoter. One can assume that writing in the way Heraclitus intended may fetch more marks but then again it will all depend on how coherent one manages to deal with the topic
So you are suggesting that using concepts of optionals is not a good idea?
Can someone explain what we had to write for Q. 1 GS 2. I can't think beyond maneka Gandhi case and Article 21. It specifically talks on "constitutionalization"
Yeah. But had to narrow down as it mentioned "Supreme Court"
"You cannot step twice in the same river". One can step into the same river more than once since one can commit the same mistakes over and over again. However had the quote been "You MUST not step twice in the same river", then the quote would have made sense. That way the quote becomes prescriptive not to commit the same mistake.
Deleted
@tmblnd1325194 i hope it's an Indian history question 🤞
