Shubhra Ranjan IAS Study

PSIR Test 1 Model Answers

Q1.“ The perfect Guardian must be a philosopher” (Plato).

Answer:

Plato has been regarded as the founder of philosophical idealism by virtue of his attempt to
formulate and define political ideas within the large framework of Idea of “good” or “ideal”.
His main purpose was to make Athens an “Ideal State”.

The theory of the philosopher Guardian or ruler is the linchpin of Plato’s Ideal State. It was
derived from the conviction that the philosopher has the knowledge, intellect and training to
govern. He told that the best law and the best constitution come into being only when the
supreme power in the man coincides with the greatest wisdom and templates.

Accepting the Socratic idea that “knowledge is virtue”, Plato argued that wrong deeds had
their origin in ignorance, whereas knowledge leads to right actions and happiness. A/Q to
Plato, a philosopher, by his grace of the idea of good was the best qualified to rule, implying
that a philosopher would be able to administer perfect justice and act for the good of the
community.

He held that a philosopher King has all the qualities of a ruler such as truthfulness, disposition,
reason. He is devoid of emotional ties (Communism of family) and economic consideration
(Communism of property). A Philosopher would be public-spirited, honest and wise. The
Philosopher ruler is the right person to govern for he would be least enthused about acquiring
power for self-arrangements.

Therefore, for Plato, an ideal state ruled by the philosopher ruler in a divine institution perfectly
worthy of emulation and imitation. it is in this context, there is no other way to Real happiness,
either for society or the individual.

However, despite being described as the most original concept in all the Platonic concepts, the
theory of ‘Philosopher king’ has been criticized on several grounds. A/Q to Crosman, Plato
remained an Aristocrat, convinced that the peasants, craftsman etc. were incapable of political
responsibility. In a broader sense, platonic idea of government by the elite by a few highly
trained qualified Experts, runs counter to the spirit of democracy. Karl Popper rejects the
conception of despotic rule by specially trained philosopher leading to totalitarianism and
unmitigated authoritarianism. In the same line, in the ideal state of Aristotle, there is no place
for the Philosopher King for he prefers ‘Rule of Law’ over ‘Rule of Person’.

Q 2. ‘Aristotle is a status quoist’. In the light of this statement, examine Aristotle's view
on revolution.
Answer:

In the history of Western political tradition, both Plato and Aristotle enjoy a pre-eminent
position as the great Masters. while Plato was an idealist and a radical, Aristotle is a realist and
a moderate. Aristotle has been regarded as the father of Political Science as he was the first to
analyse, critically and systematically, the subject matter of politics and identified its core
elements such as Sovereignty of law, constitutionalism, faith in moderation, proportionate
equality, and causes and remedies of revolution.

As instability and transformation has been the most characteristic feature of Greek Political
life, Aristotle has examined the cause for instability, change and revolution, and prescribed
remedies against unnecessary and incessant change. For Aristotle, Revolution meant any
change in the political system such as change from a moderate to an extreme form of
government, modification of a constitution, replacement or change in institution or a set of a
person etc. In other words, for Aristotle, every constitutional change was a social and political
revolution.

Unlike Plato, Aristotle perceived multiple, general and particular causes for revolution,
rather than simply regime’s prominent deficiency. Among the general causes, feeling of
inequality, dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs, universal passion for power and
privileges, fearlessness and corruption of ruling classes and their arrogance are the prominent
causes for revolution in all form of government.

In addition, Aristotle also examine the specific causes of revolution in various form of
government. In democracy revolutions are usually caused by the policy of demagogues in
attacking the rich, individually or collectively. In oligarchies, they are partly due to the unjust
and oppressive treatment of the masses and class. Revolution in aristocracy arise because of
the jealousy created by narrowly restricting power and privileges to a small circle of people.

Aristotle’s discussion of the means of preventing revolution and achieving stability is as

important as his analysis of the causes. He has made a number of practical suggestions
concerning the methods by which political system may be successfully maintained and
revolution prevented. The most prominent suggestions include moderate exercise of power,
prevent feeling of injustice, educate the people, cultivate the spirit of obedience to law, clean
administration, inculcate Patriotism Etc.

Q 3. ‘Machiavelli made a unique contribution to the discussion on statecraft’. Elaborate

and comment.

Answer:

Machiavelli in the west, represents the first clear break from idealism and morality and,
thus, considered to be the first modern thinker. A/Q to Lerner, the whole drift of Machiavelli’s
work is towards a political realism, unknown to the formal writing of his time. Bacon praised
Machiavelli for his realism and pragmatism and the fact that he wrote about human nature, the
Join TelegramGroups
To Boost Your Preparation
PDF4Exams One stop solution for study
Click Here materials of all competitiveexams

The Hindu ZoneOfficial

Newspapers & study Click Here
materials

TestSeries4Exam
All paid test series
Click Here availabblewithoutanycost

Pdfbasket
All e-Magazines
in your hand Click Here
Hindi Books
All study materials
Click Here
in Hindi

eSandesh (An Indian App)

For More download eSandesh App from play store

https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/allupscmaterial

nature of political society and its actual operations, with a concern about how things ‘are’,
rather than how they ‘ought to be’.

Machiavelli's’ ‘Prince’, a product of the prevailing conditions of his time, is a memorandum

on the art of Government and state craft for a successful rulership. .A/Q to Butterfield,
Machiavelli’s science of statecraft (or maxims to the ruler) developed out of ministerial
correspondence, study of history and its lessons, the ancient wisdom and from examples of
great and noble deeds.

Deviating from medieval principles and theories, Machiavelli suggested that politics is
different from religion and ethics. Proposing the ‘power view of politics’, he held that
politics is the management of power. Thus, he suggested the Prince that he should aim at
acquisition and extension of his princely powers and territories. The two basic means for
success for a ruler are- the judicious use of law and physical force. Thus, a prince must
combine in himself rational as well as brutal characteristics- a combination of “Lion” and
“Fox”. In addition he argued that the prince will be judged by the end he achieved. As ends
will be justified by the means to be employed, Prince should not suffer from dilemma in opting
the means.

Instead of preaching about idle state or fullest moral development of political men, Machiavelli
was mainly concerned with the security of the state. For Machiavelli a well-ordered state
ensures the wellbeing and security necessary to combat social conflict in radical selflessness
of human nature. Behind his suggestions and advice to the Prince, the freedom of the country,
a desire for reservation of the state and common good was the core theme.

A/Q to Jones, Machiavelli’s insight that the state can be understood only in terms of human
lust and appetites, and his supplementary recognition that successful ruler must learn to control
these forces, make an approach in political thinking and constitute the basis for the whole
modern development.

Question 4:- ‘The cause of sedition is always found in inequality’ (Aristotle). Explain.

Answer:

The given statement explains Aristotle’s theory of justice in his work ‘Politics’. Justice for
Aristotle is a complete virtue, though not absolute. It is a relative concept understood in
relation to others in the society.

Aristotle theory of justice is linked to his idea of equality. A/Q to him, justice demands
distribution of officers, rewards etc. According to the contribution based on merit of the
citizens. He held that persons who are equal and possess equal merit ought to be treated equally.
In other words, those who contribute more to the performance of good action in services of the
state thus show greater civic excellence deserve more from the state than those who contribute
less.

Therefore, Aristotle’s theory of justice is based on ‘proportional equality’, which means that
people should receive from the state, in the way of just rewards, proportionately to their merits.
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/allupscmaterial

In this way, Aristotle does not support absolute equality, is being injustice with the person who
is more talented and meritorious. He held that if a state will give equal treatment to those who
are unequal in their merit and talent, it will give rise to the feeling of injustice, which ultimately
results into revolutions and seditions.

Therefore, injustice for Aristotle arise when equals are treated unequally, and unequals
equally. He held that it was necessary to distinguish between the deserving and the
undeserving. In this way, Aristotle regarded equality is crucial to Social justice and stability.

However, merit can one of the criteria of justice, but it cannot be the sole Criterion of Justice.
A/Q to John Rawls, as authority on Idea of Justice, fairness is the most important
characteristic of a just society. The constitution of India reflects the idea of justice based on
the principle of fairness. in Indian context, as a level- playing field does not exists, merit alone
cannot insure justice in the true sense.

Question 5:- Give a critical evolution of the political philosophy of Machiavelli and so
how far he represents the beginning of modern age.

Answer:

Machiavelli in the Western political tradition represents the first clear break from idealism and
morality, reflecting the spirit of Renaissance. Machiavelli's ‘Prince’, a product of the prevailing
conditions of his time is not an academic treaties or value oriented political philosophy, whether
it represents ‘political realism’ or ‘real politics’. Pragmatic in its character, ‘the Prince’
provides technique of the fundamental principles of state craft for a successful rulership.

Machiavelli dignity lies in his efforts, in providing and outlook that accepted both
‘Secularization and moralization’ of politics. He took politics out of the domain of religion
(Church) and subordinated moral principles to the necessities of political existence and people's
welfare. In addition, his political realism allowed him to expose the ‘power of politics’. He
identified politics as the struggle for acquisition, maintenance and consideration of political
power.

Contrary to the ancient theory of ‘city- states’, Machiavelli became the forerunner of that theory
of ‘Nation states’. Though he did not use the term ‘nationality’ in its modern sense, but his
concern that state should be unified into a nation state contains an element of modernity in his
political thought.

However, the status of Machiavelli as the first modern thinkers remains contested. This is so
because modernity, in the context of political thought. is based upon following basic ideas-
1. Idea of sovereignty.
2. relationship between politics and religion
3. nature of the method employed

Despite the fact that Machiavelli made a decisive break from the mediaeval political thought
by distinguishing between state and religion (secularism), he failed to propound theory of
sovereignty. It was Jean Bodin who made the first attempt at developing the theory of
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/allupscmaterial

sovereignty. However, despite making the first attempt, Bodin failed to overcome the
mediaeval mentality and limited the concept of sovereignty to the secular sphere of life. Thus,
it was Hobbesian ‘Leviathan’ the theory of absolute sovereignty of the state.
Therefore, Machiavelli is regarded by some scholars as a ‘non-medieval’ thinker, and not
the first modern thinker because of his successful attempt at separating Church (religion)
from the state (politics) and his failure at developing a theory of sovereignty in its modern
sense.

Evaluation of Machiavelli

Machiavelli commanded a sinister reputation is no other thinker in the annals of Political

Theory. ‘Machiavellism’ symbolize all evil things in the realm of politics. This was because
Machiavelli sanctioned the use of deception, cruelty, force, violence for achieving desired
political ends. He subordinates moral principles of political existence and separated politics
from ethics and religion.

Sabine calls Machiavelli as ‘Narrowly dated and narrowly located’ particularly for his
passionate view of human nature. He criticized Machiavelli on the ground that his thoughts
lack universal and transcendental relevance.

Machiavelli is also criticized for his political realism that allowed him to remain neutral
towards the means that were to be employed for achieving the end. not as actions, but solely in
terms of their consequences action of rulers like Hitler and Mussolini.

In this way, despite producing one of the greatest works in the field of statecraft, Machiavelli
has been criticized for telling the truth and has been confined to permanent infamy for making
the first attempt to identify essential ingredients of modern Political Theory. A/Q to Sabine,
owing to his political idea, Machiavelli has been represented as an otter cynic, an amoral
thinker, and an ardent Nationalist, none of them give a complete picture either of Machiavelli
or his thought.

Despite the fact that Machiavelli advocated separation of religion or ethics and politics, it is
not justified to call him ‘Amoral’. This is so because his suggestions were primarily from the
point of view of the preservation of the state, every other consideration being secondary.
Instead of preaching about ideal state or fullest moral development of political men,
Machiavelli was more concerned with the security of the state. Moreover, he does not permit
Prince to take those actions which may be against religious norms of morality, for his self-
interest. He is permitting Prince only in the context of the national interest. Thus, behind his
suggestions, was National patriotism and desire for preservation of the state. In this sense, he
plays nationalism above all other duties and morality.

Question 6:- ‘Justice is the hinge of Plato’s thought and the text of his discourse’
(Barker). Discuss.

Answer:
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/allupscmaterial

The idea of justice has been the core concern of the subject of political philosophy from Plato
to Marx, Marx to Rawls and Rawls to Amartya Sen. Plato, who has been regarded as the
founder of philosophical idealism, has discussed the idea of justice in depth.

During his days incompetence and factionalism, unrighteousness and injustice reigned
supreme. Thus, Plato was keen to find solution to all these Socio Political evils and in the
conception of justice, he found the sustainable remedy of curing these evils. Therefore, the
primary issue of Plato's Republic is the discovery of the true nature of Justice. A/Q to E. Barker
the Republic in Greek meant justice and should not be understood in its Latin sense meaning
‘the state or the polity’.

Plato's main purpose was the substitution of a true conception of justice for the false views,
which common error and sophists teaching had contrived to spread. A/Q to Barker, whether it
is combating the sophists or reforming the society, justice forms the central part of his thought.

In the process of construction of his conception of Justice, Plato critically examined

contemporary views on Justice and then defined his concept.

1. Traditional view of Cephalus & Polemarchus: For Cephalus, justice is doing one's
duty and paying one's dues or debts. Polemarchus, son of Cephalus presented the
traditional view of justice in a slightly altered form. He suggests that justice means
given to each man what is proper to him. It means justice is an art which involves being
good to friends and Evil to enemies.

Plato's response: While Plato approved that justice is doing one's duty but he rejects
the conventional view of paying one’s dues as it takes into consideration only the
relation between the individuals and ignores the society.

In addition as against Polemarchus views, Plato held that as it is not easy to identify
effectively only friend and enemies, it is better to be good to all.

2. Radical view of Thrasymachus: A/Q to this theory, justice is the interest of the
stronger. In other words, ‘might is right’, A man ought to do what he can do and
deserve what he can get. This theory was supported by sophist including Thrasymachus,
who held that those in power make laws in their own interest and others follow them.

Plato's response: The fact that Plato was unable to counter this theory, with a strong
argument was an acknowledgement of the fact that this view is based on the reality of
the world of politics. However, Plato argued that justice was not argument of the
stronger. The ruler’s duty is to serve the interest of all.

3. Pragmatic or contractual theory of Glaucon: A/Q to Glaucon, Justice is an artificial

thing and product of convention. Glaucon ground justice on the Instinct of fear and
define If as the necessity or the interest of weaker. hence state is only for the protection
of weak, who came together to form the state.

Plato's response: For Plato, Justice is not meant only for weak and acts in the interest
of all. He denies justice as conventional and, hence something external as prepended
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/allupscmaterial

by Thrasymachus & Glaucon. On the contrary, Plato held that justice is something
internal as it is the right condition of human soul.

Having rejected the various theories of Justice, Plato propounds his own theory of Justice. the
following are some of the characteristics of platonic justice-

1. Conception of justice is based on the principle of functional specialization and

noninterference.
2. it is based on the principle of peace and harmony.
3. justice is quality of human soul and, thus internal.
4. just as the justice of the state is the due performance of the duties of each class, the
justice of the individual means the due performance by each of the three elements of
appetite, spirit and reason within their proper limits.

In this way, in dealing with the question of achieving justice, Plato’s “Republic” focused on
other interrelated themes like right kind of life, nature of human beings, purpose of political
life, ideal type of political system, need for good rules and nature of knowledge. Therefore,
according to Plato, other virtues can flourish only when they are preserved by justice. It is in
this context Barker commented that the entire Plato’s thought is hinged around the concept of
Justice.

Question 7. Bring out the progressive conservatism of Aristotle, with reference to his
views on slavery and citizenship.

Answer:

Professor Bowle declares that of all the books on the subject, The Politics is the most influential
and the most profound. A/Q to Dr. Zeller, Aristotle’s “politics” is the greatest contribution to
political philosophy that we posses.

Despite being permitted by Platonism to a very high degree, Aristotle’s method of studying the
state and its problems is highly different from that of Plato. While Plato was an idealist and a
radical, Aristotle is a realist and conservative. It is fidelity to fact of past history which make
him conservative and prevents him from being radical like Plato. A person who attaches great
importance to the accumulated wisdom of the past cannot be a revolutionary.

The conserving element in Aristotle’s ideas were his defense of slavery and his conception of
citizenship, particularly confining women within their homes and family. This was because he
believed in natural hierarchy among human beings and that individual difference in their
abilities, capacities and merits.

Aristotle, in his work ‘politics’, has discussed at length the relationship between the master and
slave. He tried to explain the relevance of ancient system of slavery, and institution that was
universal. He defended slavery both from the point of view of the slave and the master (the
householder). Aristotle believed that some persons were by nature free and other slaves. He
argued that those who possess qualities of reason and courage or masters by nature and others
who lack these qualities are slaves by nature. From the perspective of utility, system of slavery
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/allupscmaterial

provides master the leisure time for moral and intellectual pursuit that would enable him to
contribute to the affairs of the state. On the other hand, it is a necessity for a Slave because he
does not have reason and required someone else to guide him.

Apart from his theory of slavery, Aristotle placed the theme of citizenship at the center of his
political analysis because of a belief in a law based government. Based on the traditional Greek
ideals of constitutional rule of participation by the citizens in the deliberative function of the
state, Aristotle has focused on the substantive or functional aspect of the concept of citizenship
rather than on formal legal status. A/Q to Aristotle citizenship is a duty or responsibility-based
concept. A citizen is one who enjoyed the right and has the capacity to participate in the affair
of the state, particularly legislative and judicial functions.

For Aristotle, young and the old cannot be citizens, for one is immature and other week or
feeble. He did not regard women as citizens, for the lack the deliberative faculty and
the leisure to understand the working of politics. Therefore, a woman's rightful place is her
house or private realm because of her abilities as a wife, mother and householder. Using the
criterion of reason he also ruled out slaves and workers. Thus, for Aristotle only natural born
adult male processing property qualifies to be citizen as he process the intelligence and abilities
to rule and be ruled and this can devote himself to the task and responsibilities of citizenship.

Aristotle theory of slavery and citizenship have been criticized of being too narrow and
unsustainable and outdated conception in the present day of democracy.

Question 8:- While many of Plato’s ideas were utopian and have no practical value today,
others represent the abiding truth. (Gettel)

Answer:

Plato has been regarded as the founder of classical idealism by virtue of his attempts to
conceptualize that disorders and crisis of the actual world and presented it to his readers a vision
of desirable political and social order. Thus, Plato has been credited with laying the foundation
of the philosophical perspectives and issues on which the Western political tradition rests. In
this context Whitehead has commented that ‘the entire European philosophical tradition is
nothing but a set of footnotes of Plato’.

In his work ‘Republic’, Plato’s greatest work, he has attempted to established the philosophical
tradition of Justice. And in doing so, he set forth his conceptions of an ideal state. His book
explored the notion of justice and its realisation within the individual and the state. It sketched
a detailed picture of the polity and social institutions with a view of attaining human excellence
and perfection. It had an elaborate scheme of education which led Rousseau to comment that
it was hardly a political work but a finenest treatise on education ever written. It contained a
detailed examination of the meaning of good life and outline the means to achieve it. Accepting
the Socratic Dicta ‘virtue is knowledge’ and ‘a life unexamined is not worth living’, Plato
argued that wrong deeds have their origin in ignorance, where as knowledge leads to right
action, happiness and conversion of the soul.
https://telegram.me/pdf4exams https://telegram.me/allupscmaterial

However, Plato’s ideas and theories have been criticized of being utopian because the ideal
state was considered to be unrealistic and unrealizable. Critics argue that the philosopher ruler
is not natural ruler and governing was pressed upon him in the larger interest of the community.
Leo Strauss considered Republic as the greatest critic of political idealism ever written as it
appears to be a satire written with the purpose of demonstrating the limits of what was
politically feasible.

While most of Plato’s conception and ideas are considered to be utopian and unrealistic, his
other schemes and ideas were based on practical experiences of his space and time. In an
attempt to explode the essence of governance, Plato has shown why it is more important for
the ruling class to understand the idea of governance. It is because of the ignorance of the ruling
class that the problems of corruption arise, which he himself experienced in the Athens of his
time. In addition, his work, ‘Republic’, was written in the form of a dialogue, a method of great
importance in clarifying questions and establishing truth.

Plato insisted that temperate attitude towards property was necessary for security and wellbeing
of the state. Too much acquisitiveness and love for one’s possessiveness ruined unity and moral
goodness of the state. Thus, Plato clearly perceived the disastrous consequences of combining
the economic and political power. In this way, Plato was the first to understand the implication
of the role that economic factor can play in politics.

Therefore, despite being the master of political philosophy and idealism, Plato’s formulation
are also based on truth and knowledge. A/Q to Nettleship, the book Republic may be regarded
not only as a philosophical work but as a treatise on social and political reforms.