Mission Mains 2021: GS 4 Ethics Discussion
This is for those of you who are planning to write Mains 2020. Primarily, the agenda of this thread would be
1. Answer Writing Practice
2. Sharing examples - anecdotes from Current affairs relevant for GS4 Answer writing
3. Any doubts wrt. Paper 4!
Feel free to pool in your suggestions!
Dutch PM appointed Opposition leader as Minister for Health.
The new health minister was appointed based on his years of experience in healthcare, setting aside any party political interests.
Can be used as an example for - Non Partisanship, Courage, National interest etc.
@upsc2020 able 2 remember all??
Didn't understand.
1. “Arriving at a conclusion” is a process, whereby you analyse both sides of the issues and then come to a conclusion based on the analyses. It gives an impression of being rational in making judgments/decisions.
2. Marks is provided based on content and that is what’s important. The only way to showcase that is analysing the issue/question from all aspect. In the end, your actual opinion to the direct question matters very less in the marks given
3. The only exception is an essay. Where you can give a hint about your opinions and let the examiner know where your essay will be headed in the initial part only.
You mentioned “both sides of the issue”.
I am considering that you meant “pros and cons/positives and negatives” there.
Now read this question:-
Hitting a woman is wrong. Do you agree?
Now in this question , will you critically evaluate too like will you give benefits and harms of hitting a woman?
I’m assuming a “No”.
Here one would definitely mention why we shouldn’t hit a woman(negatives of hitting woman) and can also suggest some way forwards that can be adopted to boost woman pride.
so here, the answer to this question can be directly started by saying yes one agree to this statement followed by why one think this way in the body part, is what i believe.
Sorry, I have been away because of some Covid issues.
The point that you are making, is it based on your logic or previous Mains experience, and experience of Mains marking?
Obviously, in an answer Hitting a woman is wrong. Do you agree?
You dont have to write positives of hitting a woman.
But what you have to write is why some people think hitting a woman is okay. Here "some" and "think" is important.
You have write this in 2-3 lines. Anyone who does this does get more marks than one who says "Hitting woman is bad because".
Plus going by your argument, do you think they really want YOUR Personal OPINION?
The point(hitting a woman is wrong) that you are talking about was for someone else.
I do not have any prior mains experience. I raised the concern of answering directly as a Yes or a No in such questions which seem to be opinion based based upon my common sense.
Like most of us aspirants who have imbibed in our brains the mantra of sticking to and addressing the demand of the question, I personally feel that it is okay to comment yes or no if and when asked in a question. If one is not doing so, as the mantra says, IMO, that person is not doing justice to the question while answering it. ( I may be wrong here)
Also I feel that there is no harm for me in conveying my personal opinion backed by my personal knowledge, if presented in a balanced manner. I am confident so far that the content and answer writing skill that I possess, it will be good enough to get average marks if not high(please don’t consider this as over-confidence). Again, all this is based on my experience so far with daily answer writing practice and mocks. I will be in a better position to clarify my stance post writing the official mains examination. :p
P.S.- the point that you suggested in the latter post is duly noted. Thank you!
Patootie,Q: Non-performance of duty by a public servant is a form of corruption”. Do you agree with this view? Justify your answer. (150 words) 10
A public servant is one who occupies an office that is connected with matters that have a direct or indirect bearing on public rights both at the individual as well as the community level. Non-performance of duty by public servants is inconsistent with public justice, and those indulging in it are often not only corrupt, but also ethically and morally bankrupt. When public justice is frustrated, democracy becomes meaningless, and those directly responsible for the same are, by all definitions, corrupt.
Consider a government doctor for example. In "Everybody loves a good drought", P Sainath refers to the pitiable condition of PHCs in the country. As per his account, in rural areas, Government doctors who are legally obligated to provide service free of cost are often found running their own private practice right next to the PHCs. The effect of this is:
1. The Government Doctor earns both from the government (salary) and fees from his patients
2. The poor/illiterate patient does not realize his deserved right.
3. Loss is caused both to the exchequer and to the rural economy.
4. On account of absence of free service, public health suffers greatly.
5. Conditions normalising such behaviour are fostered.
A public official is said to be corrupt if his/her actions are such that they lead to an erosion of faith in the institutions they represent. If an institution is ineffective, it serves no use in a democracy that the people have established.
Freedom means nothing to a person who does not have the means to be truly free. If Public servants, who exist as a vehicle to realising fundamental freedoms, voluntarily and willingly shirk off their responsibility, what else are they but corrupt?
Q: Non-performance of duty by a public servant is a form of corruption”. Do you agree with this view? Justify your answer. (150 words) 10A public servant is one who occupies an office that is connected with matters that have a direct or indirect bearing on public rights both at the individual as well as the community level. Non-performance of duty by public servants is inconsistent with public justice, and those indulging in it are often not only corrupt, but also ethically and morally bankrupt. When public justice is frustrated, democracy becomes meaningless, and those directly responsible for the same are, by all definitions, corrupt.
Consider a government doctor for example. In "Everybody loves a good drought", P Sainath refers to the pitiable condition of PHCs in the country. As per his account, in rural areas, Government doctors who are legally obligated to provide service free of cost are often found running their own private practice right next to the PHCs. The effect of this is:
1. The Government Doctor earns both from the government (salary) and fees from his patients
2. The poor/illiterate patient does not realize his deserved right.
3. Loss is caused both to the exchequer and to the rural economy.
4. On account of absence of free service, public health suffers greatly.
5. Conditions normalising such behaviour are fostered.
A public official is said to be corrupt if his/her actions are such that they lead to an erosion of faith in the institutions they represent. If an institution is ineffective, it serves no use in a democracy that the people have established.
Freedom means nothing to a person who does not have the means to be truly free. If Public servants, who exist as a vehicle to realising fundamental freedoms, voluntarily and willingly shirk off their responsibility, what else are they but corrupt?
Formed an opinion in the starting sentence itself! Give arguments first, evaluate and then form your opinion later in the end based on this
What about non-performance of duty due extraneous situations like lack of funds, resources, manpower, lack of cooperation from higher authorities?
What about non-performance because of improper training / capacity building given to the public official?
What about a case where there is conflict between 2 equally important duties? Giving preference to one over other will naturally lead to non-performance in other duty.
In other words, if a public servant is unable to function properly because of extraneous considerations, aren't those extraneous factors such as a non-cooperating superior or improper/negligent training staff the ones who should be called out as not performing their duties?
If a Policeman is not allowed to register an FIR because of a corrupt superior, who is the one who is not performing his duty?
@Ethereal Thanks for your response. Valid points.But I understood the question as asking about a public servant who is wilfully neglecting his duties. And his duty would be to fulfil his role to the best of his abilities and capacity. I understood the question as relating more to the intent of the servant rather than the results he produces.Does the question require us to investigate the cause of non-performance? If I investigated that, how do I take a view and justify my answer? Also, if I did that, how would I be answering the question? The quote isn't "Non-Performance of duty is *always* corruption." It's a general statement. Must I overthink and find possible excuses for a fictitious public servant?Generally, ceterus paribus, non performance of duty by a public servant is corruption.Also, wrt your specific points:1. Lack of funds, resources etc are factors which inhibit someone from performing his duties. Unless his duties are to obtain such funds, he is not being derelict in his duties. Similarly, if higher authorities arent cooperating when they are supposed to, aren't they the ones who are not doing their duties? He would be doing his duties to the maximum of his ability, which is the duty of every employee everywhere.2. Again, I understood it as wilful non-performance. I didnt think the question related to an employee lacking in performance because of improper training. If he is improperly trained, he may be lacking in performance, but he would be performing his duty to the best of his ability.3. Same as above. If he willingly shirks off his responsibility, he is corrupt. If he makes a decision prioritising one over the other, he must explain why he did so.
I was just trying to say that as a comment it's okay but as an ethics answer, your whole argument can be condensed to a simple sentence like.....a public official is paid salary which is charged on the tax payers. Hence, any willful non-performance of duty is essentially a form of corruption and a burden on exchequer which erodes trusts and hinders developmental process.
Everything else you have written is based around this. So for an examiner it is just noise however beautifully you have made that noise.
You are using 150 words for one single idea.
As an answer,
- one has to mention about why non-performance is form of corruption
- specific situations and cases where it should not be seen as so
- conclusion - as to how we should distinguish between willful and unintentional non-performance and not make sweeping generalizations.
Atleast, that would have covered 150 words with multiple dimensions
Anyways, ethics is subjective. Everyone has different interpretations of the same question.
1. “Arriving at a conclusion” is a process, whereby you analyse both sides of the issues and then come to a conclusion based on the analyses. It gives an impression of being rational in making judgments/decisions.
2. Marks is provided based on content and that is what’s important. The only way to showcase that is analysing the issue/question from all aspect. In the end, your actual opinion to the direct question matters very less in the marks given
3. The only exception is an essay. Where you can give a hint about your opinions and let the examiner know where your essay will be headed in the initial part only.
You mentioned “both sides of the issue”.
I am considering that you meant “pros and cons/positives and negatives” there.
Now read this question:-
Hitting a woman is wrong. Do you agree?
Now in this question , will you critically evaluate too like will you give benefits and harms of hitting a woman?
I’m assuming a “No”.
Here one would definitely mention why we shouldn’t hit a woman(negatives of hitting woman) and can also suggest some way forwards that can be adopted to boost woman pride.
so here, the answer to this question can be directly started by saying yes one agree to this statement followed by why one think this way in the body part, is what i believe.
Sorry, I have been away because of some Covid issues.
The point that you are making, is it based on your logic or previous Mains experience, and experience of Mains marking?
Obviously, in an answer Hitting a woman is wrong. Do you agree?
You dont have to write positives of hitting a woman.
But what you have to write is why some people think hitting a woman is okay. Here "some" and "think" is important.
You have write this in 2-3 lines. Anyone who does this does get more marks than one who says "Hitting woman is bad because".
Plus going by your argument, do you think they really want YOUR Personal OPINION?
The point(hitting a woman is wrong) that you are talking about was for someone else.
I do not have any prior mains experience. I raised the concern of answering directly as a Yes or a No in such questions which seem to be opinion based based upon my common sense.
Like most of us aspirants who have imbibed in our brains the mantra of sticking to and addressing the demand of the question, I personally feel that it is okay to comment yes or no if and when asked in a question. If one is not doing so, as the mantra says, IMO, that person is not doing justice to the question while answering it. ( I may be wrong here)
Also I feel that there is no harm for me in conveying my personal opinion backed by my personal knowledge, if presented in a balanced manner. I am confident so far that the content and answer writing skill that I possess, it will be good enough to get average marks if not high(please don’t consider this as over-confidence). Again, all this is based on my experience so far with daily answer writing practice and mocks. I will be in a better position to clarify my stance post writing the official mains examination. :p
P.S.- the point that you suggested in the latter post is duly noted. Thank you!
Hello,
I re-read what I wrote earlier and I think trying to be in a hurry, I have sounded pretty rude. Please accept my apologies for this. I cannot understand at all why I wrote what I wrote.
Coming to the point,
What happens is generally in our first Mains in GS and even in essay we end up writing this. Yes, I agree that .
It has not fetched marks. You get it immediately after first Mains after you see other people”s answers when you don’t get interview call.
So I was curious if you have written with this approach in Mains and scored well, because then maybe I would like to speak to you. This changes a lot of things about the exam.
The exam is very dynamic and I would like to keep updated with any changes that happen.
Till 2016-17, one short cut to get an interview call was to just finish the paper. Now by finishing the paper, we cannot assure interview call also. The bar of what is normal is rising every year.
So things change and the more we discuss, the more clarity we have.
Even in an essay if the essay topic is Is globalisation dead , and if you write yes it is dead and here is why, it has not fetched marks.
You will realise that you are expected to write why some people argue it is dead, and also why may be said that it is not dead. By logic it always looks as to why should I not write yes it is dead. But generally people end up getting 80-90 marks for this. That has been my experience. And basically everybody does it in first go, unless someone is there to tell them.
By no means I meant to offend you.
I am no knight. Do not call me Sir|Philosophy behind ForumIAS
1. “Arriving at a conclusion” is a process, whereby you analyse both sides of the issues and then come to a conclusion based on the analyses. It gives an impression of being rational in making judgments/decisions.
2. Marks is provided based on content and that is what’s important. The only way to showcase that is analysing the issue/question from all aspect. In the end, your actual opinion to the direct question matters very less in the marks given
3. The only exception is an essay. Where you can give a hint about your opinions and let the examiner know where your essay will be headed in the initial part only.
You mentioned “both sides of the issue”.
I am considering that you meant “pros and cons/positives and negatives” there.
Now read this question:-
Hitting a woman is wrong. Do you agree?
Now in this question , will you critically evaluate too like will you give benefits and harms of hitting a woman?
I’m assuming a “No”.
Here one would definitely mention why we shouldn’t hit a woman(negatives of hitting woman) and can also suggest some way forwards that can be adopted to boost woman pride.
so here, the answer to this question can be directly started by saying yes one agree to this statement followed by why one think this way in the body part, is what i believe.
Sorry, I have been away because of some Covid issues.
The point that you are making, is it based on your logic or previous Mains experience, and experience of Mains marking?
Obviously, in an answer Hitting a woman is wrong. Do you agree?
You dont have to write positives of hitting a woman.
But what you have to write is why some people think hitting a woman is okay. Here "some" and "think" is important.
You have write this in 2-3 lines. Anyone who does this does get more marks than one who says "Hitting woman is bad because".
Plus going by your argument, do you think they really want YOUR Personal OPINION?
The point(hitting a woman is wrong) that you are talking about was for someone else.
I do not have any prior mains experience. I raised the concern of answering directly as a Yes or a No in such questions which seem to be opinion based based upon my common sense.
Like most of us aspirants who have imbibed in our brains the mantra of sticking to and addressing the demand of the question, I personally feel that it is okay to comment yes or no if and when asked in a question. If one is not doing so, as the mantra says, IMO, that person is not doing justice to the question while answering it. ( I may be wrong here)
Also I feel that there is no harm for me in conveying my personal opinion backed by my personal knowledge, if presented in a balanced manner. I am confident so far that the content and answer writing skill that I possess, it will be good enough to get average marks if not high(please don’t consider this as over-confidence). Again, all this is based on my experience so far with daily answer writing practice and mocks. I will be in a better position to clarify my stance post writing the official mains examination. :p
P.S.- the point that you suggested in the latter post is duly noted. Thank you!
Hello,
I re-read what I wrote earlier and I think trying to be in a hurry, I have sounded pretty rude. Please accept my apologies for this. I cannot understand at all why I wrote what I wrote.
Coming to the point,
What happens is generally in our first Mains in GS and even in essay we end up writing this. Yes, I agree that .
It has not fetched marks. You get it immediately after first Mains after you see other people”s answers when you don’t get interview call.
So I was curious if you have written with this approach in Mains and scored well, because then maybe I would like to speak to you. This changes a lot of things about the exam.
The exam is very dynamic and I would like to keep updated with any changes that happen.
Till 2016-17, one short cut to get an interview call was to just finish the paper. Now by finishing the paper, we cannot assure interview call also. The bar of what is normal is rising every year.
So things change and the more we discuss, the more clarity we have.
Even in an essay if the essay topic is Is globalisation dead , and if you write yes it is dead and here is why, it has not fetched marks.
You will realise that you are expected to write why some people argue it is dead, and also why may be said that it is not dead. By logic it always looks as to why should I not write yes it is dead. But generally people end up getting 80-90 marks for this. That has been my experience. And basically everybody does it in first go, unless someone is there to tell them.
By no means I meant to offend you.
A good way to find out is to see copies of people who have appeared for 2-3 interviews. When people appear for 2- 3 Interviews there are few common things in them
1) They have a good idea of how to clear Mains.
2) Through hit and trial they have eliminated all the mistakes that people make in initial attempts.
3) By third interview people begin to converge on basic rules of writing Mains and how to avoid the mistakes.
( Please note that people who are stuck in interview stage for 2 or more times usually have Interview or the Optional to blame - usually - everything has exceptions )
They are good people to take guidance from and you will discover those commonalities in them - at which point you will begin to accept and agree that there are things that work and things that don’t work in the exam.
I remember one kid who has commented every year on my blog articles before Mains. I read his comments, but met him only after 3-4 years since I was following him. He had cleared IRS, IPS and then IAS with a not so good cadre. He took a risk for cadre improvement. When I told him about answer writing - the first thing he said was - Sir I have studied less than other people for some reasons and One thing I know is that at least answer writing is not my problem - if it was - I would not be able to clear the exam 3-4 times. I chuckled :)
So yes, there are things that are a little standardised - I would not say rules - but best practices - which you will discover, which is why this becomes a journey. Our goal should be to keep the journey as short as possible .
I am no knight. Do not call me Sir|Philosophy behind ForumIAS
Hello,
I re-read what I wrote earlier and I think trying to be in a hurry, I have sounded pretty rude. Please accept my apologies for this. I cannot understand at all why I wrote what I wrote.
Coming to the point,
What happens is generally in our first Mains in GS and even in essay we end up writing this. Yes, I agree that .
It has not fetched marks. You get it immediately after first Mains after you see other people”s answers when you don’t get interview call.
So I was curious if you have written with this approach in Mains and scored well, because then maybe I would like to speak to you. This changes a lot of things about the exam.
The exam is very dynamic and I would like to keep updated with any changes that happen.
Till 2016-17, one short cut to get an interview call was to just finish the paper. Now by finishing the paper, we cannot assure interview call also. The bar of what is normal is rising every year.
So things change and the more we discuss, the more clarity we have.
Even in an essay if the essay topic is Is globalisation dead , and if you write yes it is dead and here is why, it has not fetched marks.
You will realise that you are expected to write why some people argue it is dead, and also why may be said that it is not dead. By logic it always looks as to why should I not write yes it is dead. But generally people end up getting 80-90 marks for this. That has been my experience. And basically everybody does it in first go, unless someone is there to tell them.
By no means I meant to offend you.
Pardon me for bombarding you and others with a lengthy post.
Even i re-read your post multiple times to ascertain if what you wrote was rude to me or offended me. But guess what, i wasn’t at all bothered, affected or offended. Whatever you wrote to me was completely neutral as per me. And hence, there is no need for you to apologise. Also, if you may allow, i would like to not accept your appologies because there aint a need here too.
Coming to the example that you raised ie “Is globalisation dead”. Now here, IMO, this is a opinion based topic. And hence, the best approach to write on this topic would be to write about it holistically like talking about “glibalozation May be dead”, “globalization May not be dead” and concluded by “what can be done to bridge the gaps in present Globalization regime”.
Again, IMO, if one, in the starting only, forms an opinion that “Globalization is dead” or “Globalization isint dead” and starts writing in this direction, then that person is bound to end up scoring restricted marks as the approach that the person follows it itself restricted.
Similarly, if we reorganise the topic keywords from “Is Globalisation dead” to Globalisation is dead”, then i think that there would be no harm in forming a opinion in the initial only ie “Globalisation is dead” or “Globalisation is alive” because now the topic is more statement based rather than opinion based.
Now let us come to the peer to peer learning that you talked about. You said to have a look at answer copies of those people who have given interview 2-3 times. Now tell me where and how can i find and Interact with such people who are willing to share their answers with me.
I have got to know and come into contact with 3 interview given candidates/apirants( 2 on quest and 1 on beta). I asked two of them to share their answers but unfortunately they didn’t. They said that they will, i tried to make them remember once or twice that they should share their answers with me but despite of efforts, they didn’t. But i have no issues with that too. Both of them are extremely talented people and fun persons to talk to. The third person that i came in contact with is a nice person too but a hell lota busy guy. I have sent him my answers for evaluation. He praised my writing skills and told me that i have much capability. He didn’t help me with much improvements that i can make but he offers his content/knowledge/pointers which serves me as brilliant fodder material. One thing that i noticed is that the veterans or experienced candidates do not have much time with them to spend on other candidates; they are busy with and in their own preparation mostly. This is my personal opinion cum experience. So if any person who is reading this and is willing to share their answers, or are interested in mutual answer evaluation, feel free to come into contact.
Last but not the least, i would really like to thank you for the time that you have given to reply as well as the actions that you have taken. Seriously, I’m brimming with confidence right now and i hope that i sustain this mindset for a longer term(atleast till 4th October :p). Again, thank you very much.
P.S.- even i am curious too to find out the reason why you think or thought that i was offended. Did my reply to your post made you feel that i was offended because you were rude? And worry not, i was not at all. :D
Write your comment…
