Ethics: Nandan Sir

Lecture V
Ethics and Human Interface
Broad Topics: Essence/Dimensions/Consequences of Ethics/Ethics in Private & Public
Relationships/Human Values-Lessons from Thinkers from India & World/Philosophical
basis of Governance and Probity.
Concrete Themes:
Dimensions of Ethics:
❖ Ethics & Religion
❖ Ethics & Politics
❖ Governance, Good Governance & Ethical Governance
❖ Ethics of Justice
❖ Feminist Ethics
❖ Environmental Ethics
❖ Ethics & Development
❖ Applied Ethics.
Thinkers: Leo Tolstoy, Russell, Rawls, Marx, Raja Rammohan Roy, Jotirao Phule, Savitri
Phule, Fatima Sheikh, Dayanand Saraswati, Ambedkar, Gandhi, Swami Vivekananda &
Others.
Ethics & Religion
❖ The central objective of Legal Law, Ethics & Religion can be common - to create a
life of well-being, a life of self-respect with right to life & happiness. However,
Legal Law, Ethics & Religion strive to attain the same objective in their respective
ways. All the three provide guidelines, principles & norms whereby inter-personal
conflicts can be resolved amicably & a cohesive community life can be created. Out
of these three, Religion is the most ancient institution. In primitive societies,
Religion has played a very significant role in creating a life of co-operation &
harmony.
❖ However, at the same time, with regard to the actual practice of Religion, there is
another aspect as well. If we look back in time and take a panoramic view of the
‘Journey-of-humanity’ since earliest times, we realise that while Religion has
enabled people to evolve & to endure worst kinds of suffering then, at the same
time, almost every act of immorality in the form of inhumanity, injustice, atrocities,
barbarism, genocide, riots, patriarchy, misogyny, mutilation, exclusion & natural
degradation have always been condoned in the name of Religion. We cannot blame
Religion per se, but as an ethical aspirant, one can examine prevalent conception of
Religion and strive to understand Religion in best possible manner.
❖ The word ‘Religion’ is coined from a Latin word ‘Religare’, the literal meaning of
‘Religare’ is ‘To bind together’, ‘To connect together’. Religare/Binding has been
given two important interpretations by the Religions of the World: Theistic &
Atheistic.
❖ Theistic Religions suggest that Religion prescribes a way of life, following which an
Page | 1
 individual can unite oneself with God/Almighty/ Divinity. Some of the Theistic
Religions are- Islam, Christianity & Judaism, they are also known as Semitic
Religions.
❖ Atheistic Religions, on the other hand, suggest that Religion prescribes a way of life
that fosters a sense of bonhomie, a sense of fraternity in people & thereby a cohesive
community life comes into existence. Religion connects one individual with other &
so on & so forth. Thus, Religion connects people. Some of the important Atheistic
Religions are- Buddhism, Jainism, Confucianism & Taoism.
❖ Hence, God is not an essential & central component of Religion. Theism & Religion
are not one & the same. One can be an Atheist & yet be Religious. Religion shall
imply a life of quest, resolve & perseverance, where the aspirant seeks a value
earnestly through relentless pursuit. The value can be God, Truth, Beauty, Good,
Service to Humanity, Music, Love & so on.
❖ Hinduism is a unique Religion. Hinduism cannot be defined on the lines of the
other Religions of the World. The nature of Hinduism is sui-generis. Hinduism
prescribes a way of life in accordance with the teachings enshrined in Vedic
Scriptures. The teachings of the Vedic Scriptures have been interpreted by the seers
in various ways & accordingly different systems of Hinduism have come into
existence. Thus, there is nothing like- The Hinduism. All the interpretations are
forms of A Hinduism. The six classical systems of Hinduism are: Nyaya,
Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Mimamasa & Vedanta. Hindutva is a more recent
interpretation of Hinduism, compared to the classical systems of Hinduism. Some of
the systems are also Atheistic, like Samkhya & Mimamasa. If we critically examine
the implications of Shankar’s Advaita-Vedanta, then even Advaita-Vedanta may not
remain Theistic, since it does not accept the ontological reality of a Personal God.
The system is called A-Dvait, Non-Dual, it accepts the reality of Brahman alone,
and as an individual one is essentially one with the Brahman, one’s own self is
identical with the Brahman- Aham Brahmasmi. Brahman, in true sense, is Nirguna,
Impersonal Value, The Supreme Light, The Ground of everything, the Unity in
Diversity.
❖ Thus, Hinduism is a confluence of every possible religious view. Hinduism
maintains that the Truth is one but it can be interpreted variously by different
thinkers, traditions and religions (Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti). Hinduism
inculcates a sense of Universal One-ness & Fraternity, the outlook of Vasudhaiva
Kutumbakam- The World is One Family. Hinduism prescribes dialogical approach
to life, whereby one develops syncretic world-view, one learns the art of
assimilation and develops acceptance for every possible view. One learns that
apparently conflicting views are not contradictories, rather they are the different
interpretations of the Foundational Truth from different perspectives. Accordingly,
Hinduism implies inclusive orientation, it can integrate Theism, Atheism &
Agnosticism, and all notions of God- Personalistic, Impersonalistic & Naturalistic.
❖ Gandhi interprets Hinduism as a Life of Satyagrah. Gandhi presents a secular
outlook to Hinduism by equating God with Truth & Truth with God. Gandhi

Page | 2
 proclaims- Ishvar, Allah, Tero naam, sabko sanmati de Bhagwan. For Gandhi, Ram
is not only a Personal God, he seems to equate Ram with the Foundational Value,
the Pivotal Value, where all the values of every Religion & culture would converge.
Thus, Ram can refer to the Primordial Law, The Dharma, which is Universal &
Absolute, which is not confined to a religion, community or a region, but which is
like the Natural Law that governs everything. Hence, Ram-Rajya of Gandhi shall
refer to a life of ethical-governance, a life of right to life, a life lived in accordance
with the most primordial Law of Nature.
❖ Atheistic Religions prescribe ethical way of life, where the individual oneself has to
answer- ‘What ought I to do?’. There is no God or Power, over & above the
individual, who creates values. The individual has to lead a life of self-help. As an
aspirant, one seeks knowledge autonomously through introspection & reflection.
With earnestness & resolve one follows the path of Satya, Ahimsa, Asteya,
Aparigraha & Brahmacharya, which the Buddhists call Panchshila, the Jaina
Panchvrata and Gandhi Satyagrah. Thus, belief in God is not a pre-requisite to
become ethical or virtuous.
❖ Theistic Religions do not give autonomy to the individual. ‘What ought I to do?’
has to be answered through the Commandments of the God. Ethics is the means &
Religion is the end. A value is a value because it is created by the God.
❖ Autonomy of Ethics: For an Ethical Aspirant, autonomy of Ethics is paramount.
Ethical knowledge should be the foundational knowledge, and the knowledge of
every other sphere, including Religion, should be in conformity with the ethical
knowledge. Thus, ethical values should be the fountainhead of social, economic,
cultural, legal, political & religious values.
❖ However, ‘Autonomy of Ethics’ does not imply supremacy & absoluteness of any
knowledge as a Gospel Truth, as a Final Truth, which is immune from scrutiny.
Autonomy of Ethics implies autonomy of questioning, autonomy of scientific
temper, autonomy of critical outlook, it is the sovereignty of an individual as an
aspirant whereby one seeks justification and not authority.
❖ Autonomy of Ethics would not undermine Theistic Religion or Religious
knowledge. In fact, the autonomy of ethics will enable one to study Religious Text
in best possible manner, with precision & Clarity. Religious Texts are so classical
that they cannot be comprehended through superficial reading of the lines. Text,
sub-text & context should be well-integrated. One should develop right aptitude and
orientation to study the texts. As an ordinary reader, one has so many limitations,
and, thus, one is fallible. One is susceptible to omissions & commissions. Inherent
patriarchy, misogyny, prejudices & chauvinism can vitiate the reading of the
Religious Text.
❖ Hence, autonomy of ethics will empower the ethical aspirant to study the Religious
Text with critical orientation and purge religious knowledge of anthropogenic
blemishes. Questioning is the only panacea that can discern between genuine &
pseudo knowledge. Questioning can strengthen faith rather than weaken it.
Questioning can harm blind-faith, which are essentially dogmas, prejudices &
Page | 3
 superstitions in the guise of faith. Gandhi, in Seven Social Sins, argues that Politics
without Principles, Wealth without Work, Pleasure without Conscience, Knowledge
without Character, Commerce without Morality, Science without Humanity &
Worship without Sacrifice are sins.
❖ Leo Tolstoy has a very profound understanding of Religion. Thus, he upholds the
Autonomy of Religion. In an essay ‘Religion and Morality’, Tolstoy argues that the
Religious Values are the foundational values. Religious Values are the Fountainhead
of other values, every other value, including Ethical/Moral, shall originate from the
Religious Values. The Religious Values can provide adequate nourishment to Moral
Values. In a relative sense, Moral Values can be autonomous but they must be
rooted in the Religious Values. The moment Morality is disconnected from the
Religion, it will lose its shape. The agent will cease to have respect and motivation
to uphold moral duties. Tolstoy explains it with an analogy: a young child may
pluck a flower rootless, since one is smitten by its beauty and fragrance. But after
being removed from the roots, the flower cannot sustain its beauty and charm for
long. It may get degenerated and disintegrated. Thus, Morality, independent of
Religion, even if it is created, cannot remain effective in practice.
❖ Bertrand Russell upholds Autonomy of Ethics. He states that humankind is on the
threshold of a Golden Age, but in order to progress further, it is necessary to slay
(kill) the dragon that guards the door, and this dragon is Religion. In an article ‘A
Free Man’s Worship’, Russell argues that in scientific era one must cultivate
scientific-temper & critical thinking. One should redefine ‘God’ and the mode of
worship. There was a time when Religious institutions were very authoritative, and
humanity was not free to ask questions or to intervene in religious matter. But, it is
high time that one comes out of conventional & dogmatic value system, and
becomes an autonomous agent and creates one’s own notion of Religion.
Notwithstanding the fact that there are many aspects of life which are beyond one’s
control, like, birth, death, consequences of the actions etc., one must strive to take
control of all the affairs of one’s life, to the extent possible. The autonomy of agent
implies the autonomy of ethics.
❖ Kierkegaard: For Kierkegaard, Religious stage of life is the highest level of human
existence, thus, he seems to uphold the Autonomy of Religion. However, if we
examine his position critically, we realise that as a Modern Socrates his objective is
to question conventional Religious Beliefs. He asks one to discover one’s own God
in the core of one’s inner-self. ‘Leap of Faith’ can imply the autonomy of the
aspirant to pursue one’s intrinsic voice. Thus, effectively, he prescribes Reflective-
Morality as a form of Religious Life. God as the Telos can imply Truth, Good,
Beauty, Justice, Service to Humanity & so on. Kierkegaard proclaims: the thing is to
find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die.
Existentialists like, Nietzsche & Sartre, completely denounce the existence of God
and put the onus on the individual to decide for oneself.
❖ Nietzsche suggests a world view in which there is no God. God is dead, that is, God
is irrelevant to life. In ‘The Gay Science’ a strange character called ‘The Madman’
utter strange words: “God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him”.
Page | 4
 According to Nietzsche, historically people have leaned on God, religion and
traditional ethics as crutches. But Nietzsche thinks people are free to take charge of
their lives as individuals. They must take responsibility and figure out for
themselves, why they make the choices they make, on their own. He propounds the
ethics of inner strength.
❖ Karl Marx state that Religion is the opium of the people. Marx claims that
Religious practices undermine scientific outlook of an individual and thereby one is
alienated from one’s true being, one’s rationality. This unscientific individual will
never be able to question the prevalent economic structure. Thus, Marx maintains
that Religion is created for the perpetual exploitation of the working class by the
Capitalists.
❖ Sigmund Freud, through psycho-analytical perspective claims that the belief in
God & Religion have no scientific basis. However, they can be significant in some
way, since religious activities provide a conduit to channelize & fulfill, vicariously,
some of the urges of unconscious mind. Freud seems to suggest that it is debatable
whether God is our creator, but, certainly, we have created God to deal with our
inherent turbulences.
❖ The age of Enlightenment & the contributions of crusaders & scientists, like
Darwin, have significantly undermined the authoritativeness of Religious
institutions. Our own socio-religious reform movements have diminished, to some
extent, the hold of Religious institutions over human lives.
❖ Some ethicists argue that the Ethical knowledge should be autonomous and
universal, on the lines of Mathematical knowledge, for instance, if sum of the angles
of a triangle is equal to two right angles, then it is so for both, the theists and the
atheists. Thinkers like Kant, have played a very significant role in establishing the
autonomy of Ethics.
❖ Raja Ram Mohan Roy (1772-1833): Raja Ram Mohan Roy has the epithet- The
Father of Modern India. He is a liberal thinker as well as a religious & social
reformer. He is regarded as the harbinger of renaissance in the country. ‘Raja’ title is
bestowed on him by the Mughals. He is a polymath, well versed in several
languages- Bengali, Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic, English, Hebrew, Greek & Latin. He
questions the prejudices of orthodox Hinduism, including child marriage, sati &
polygamy, and asserts the rights of Hindu women, he advocates widow marriage. He
attacks idol worship in his first book. He questions idolatory, sati, caste system, and
strives to reform Hindu society. He believes that superstitions & meaningless rituals
can be removed by studying Veda and Upanishads. He contests the claims of
Christian Missionaries that their religion is superior to all others, thus, he is critical
of proselytizing. Rammohan argues with the missionaries by quoting from the
original Bible in Hebrew & Greek. He writes ‘The Precepts of Jesus: The Guide to
Peace and Happiness’ in Bengali and Sanskrit in 1820, he omits the concept of
Trinity and, thus, attracts the ire of missionaries. For him, God is One and
undivided, this is the message of the Veda, Bible & Quran. In 1815, he founds
Atmiya Sabha, Friendship Association, to search elements that are common to

Page | 5
 different religious traditions, and to promote inter-religious understanding. In 1828,
he founds Brahmo Samaj, The Society of God, to propagate the worship of the One
God, and to fight against idolatry and polytheism. Brahmo Samaj is a cosmopolitan
house of prayer without any idol. He tries to reconcile individual’s reason with the
ancient scriptures. In 1829, Sati is legally abolished by the Governor General
William Bentick, though Roy plays a pivotal role. Roy asserts that Sati is not a
religious duty, it is not sanctioned by Hindu Scriptures. He significantly contributes
to education, he appeals to the Indians to study English to learn the science,
philosophy and literature of the West. In 1817, establishes Hindu College in Calcutta
in cooperation with David Hare to spread English education. Inspite of his criticism
of the evils of Hindu society, he is proud to be a Hindu. He is conscientious &
believes in the unity of God.
❖ Dayanand Saraswati (1824-1883): Dayanand Saraswati is the founder of Arya
Samaj. Dayanand Anglo-Vedic (DAV) schools & colleges are the educational wings
of the Arya Samaj. He establishes Gurukuls for both boys & girls on the ancient
pattern of education. In 1915, when Gandhi returns from South Africa, he sends his
sons, who have been with him in the Phoenix Ashram Durban, to Gurukul Kangri
Hardwar. Through his dictum ‘Go back to the Vedas’, Dayanand strives to spread
Vedic knowledge to eradicate superstitions & ignorance from the Hindu society. He
critiques idol-worship, meaningless rituals & the evils of the caste system. He
prefers Hindi, over Sanskrit, to reach a wider audience. He is one of the earliest
reformers to promote swadeshi and swaraj. Although he does not know English but
he encourages Indians to learn English to understand the modern scientific
advancement of the West, the name ‘Dayanand Anglo-Vedic’ implies just that.
❖ Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902): Swami Vivekananda is born on 12.01.1863 in
Calcutta as Narendra Nath Dutta. In addition to Studies, he is equally fond of physical
exercise and sports. He is endowed with melodious voice, he takes lessons in music
and likes to sing devotional songs. He studies Indian & Western Philosophy as well as
literature. Because of the demise of his father, Biswanath Dutta, Narendra Nath Dutta
encounters poverty and misery, and, thus, remains empathetic to the downtrodden and
deprived sections all through his life. Narendra Nath is contemplative and inquisitive,
he seeks the true knowledge of the God & the world. In 1881, he meets Ramakrishna
Paramhans at the Kali temple of Dakshineswar, and thereby his quest for an
enlightened Guru comes to an end. Before his death, Ramakrishna transfers his mantle
to Narendra Nath. Between 1883 to 1893, Narendra Nath traverses the country thrice,
and comes in contact with people from all walks of life- Rajas, Maharajas,
Householders & Pariahs (Untouchables). At Kanyakumari, sitting on a rock, at some
distance from the mainland, he meditates & attains the enlightenment. The rock is,
now, called the Vivekananda Rock & a beautiful memorial has been built in his
honour. He always remembers the words of his Guru, Ramakrishan: “Religion is not
for empty bellies.” The first duty of Religion is to care for the poor, the hungry and
raise them from their misery. He is extremely appalled to see the poverty and
backwardness of the people.
Ajit Singh, the Raja of Khetri, bestows upon him the name- Vivekananda. At Khetri,
Vivekananda takes up his unique attire- silk robe with turban. On 31st May 1893,
Vivekananda sails from Bombay for Chicago to attend the Parliament of Religions,
with the assistance from Maharajas of Mysore, Ramnad & Raja of Khetri, Ajit Singh.
Page | 6
 Vivekananda carries no official credentials with him, hence, he encounters difficulties
in participating the event. However, with the support of Professor J.H. Wright of
Harvard University & others, Vivekananda succeeds in attending the Parliament of
Religions.
On 11th September 1893, Vivekananda speaks towards the end of the first session. His
brief speech is ‘like a tongue of fire’. His simple opening salutations ‘Sisters &
Brothers of America’, could evoke electrifying response & hundreds rise in their seats
to applaud. He becomes the most sought-after speaker at the Parliament of Religions.
He is given the epithets ‘Orator by Divine Right’ & ‘Messenger of Indian wisdom to
the Western world’. From America, he writes: ‘Nowhere in the world are women like
those in this country. How pure, independent, self-relying and kind-hearted. It is the
women who are the life and soul of this country. All learning and culture are centred in
them’. He laments that in our country, we call women ‘despicable worms’ and
‘gateways to hell’. He observes that we are horrible sinners & our degradation is due to
the way we treat our women, poor & downtrodden. We have debased our religion by
converting it into shameful & worthless rituals. He believes that the root cause of our
misery is the debasement of our soul-inspiring religion and subordination of knowledge
of Vedant. People have opted for meaningless and dehumanizing rituals.
On 1st May 1897, he founds Ramakrishna Mission to preach the teachings of his Guru
Ramakrishna and to work for the material & spiritual welfare of the people. Swami
Vivekananda writes four principal treatise- Raja Yoga, Karma Yoga, Gyan Yoga &
Bhakti Yoga. He prescribes Abhyas (Constant practice of any one yoga) & Vairagya (
resolve & non-attachment). He proclaims- Arise, awake and stop not till the goal is
reached.
Vivekananda is immensely influenced by the monistic principle of Advaita Vedanta.
For him, religion means self-realization. The essence of every religion of the world is
same- self-realization. He believes that Universal Human transcends the difference of
caste & creed. He proclaims that an atheist is one who does not believe in oneself.
Thus, he does not understand religion in conventional sense. For him, Religion implies
‘Self-reliance & Service to fellow humans.’ The Service of God, in true sense, is the
Service of People.
He gives spiritual foundation to nationalism. He refutes the theory of Aryan invasion,
propounded by Europeans. He was only 39 when he dies. Margaret Noble, Sister
Nivedita, takes ‘Diksha’ from the Swami and devotes her life for the welfare of Indian
women.
Problem of Caste
Gandhi
❖ Gandhi is one of the most renowned philosopher and political leader of the 20th
century.
❖ Gandhi is a devout Hindu and maintains that in its prevalent form, like other religions
of the world, Hinduism contains hypocrisy and malpractices. Thus, Gandhi strives to
reform Hinduism, including the Caste system.
❖ Although Gandhi is against caste-based discrimination and subordination, but, in
principle, Gandhi supports caste-system in his earlier writings.
❖ Gandhi regards Caste system as a natural order of society.
❖ His views on Caste system change from 1920s to 1940s.
❖ Gandhi expresses his views on the Caste-system in Nava-jeevan, a Gujarati journal in
1921-22.
❖ He writes that Hindu society is able to sustain and flourish only because of the Caste
system.
❖ The seeds of Swaraj can be found in the Caste system.
Page | 7
❖ For him, different castes are like the different sections of military division and each
division works for the good of the whole.
❖ Caste system can help in spreading primary education, each caste can take the
responsibility of educating the children of that caste.
❖ Caste can, also, have political significance. It can work as an electorate for a
representative body.
❖ Caste can have judicial functions. It can elect judges to resolve disputes among the
members of the same caste.
❖ Caste can be used to raise defence force. Every caste can raise a brigade.
❖ He believes that inter-marriage and inter-dining are not necessary for national unity.
❖ The children of brothers do not inter-marry. Yet their love for each other does not
diminish.
❖ Similarly, orthodox Vaishnava women do not eat with the other members of the family.
They do not take water from a common pot. But their love for each other do not go
down.
❖ Hence, Caste system is not wrong, just because it does not allow inter-dining & inter-
marriage between different castes.
❖ For Gandhi, caste implies self-control. Caste does not allow a person to transgress
caste-limits in the pursuit of enjoyment.
❖ Gandhi maintains that the principle of hereditary occupation is the soul of the Caste
system. Hereditary principle is an eternal principle. To change it, is to create disorder.
However, in the wake of actual unjust practice of the Caste system, Gandhi does revise
his positions.
❖ Gandhi claims that he supports Caste system when it implies restraint. But, in practice,
it means limitation & not restraint. Restraint is liberating but limitation is a chain that
binds.
❖ Gandhi asserts that nothing is commendable about Caste system that is being practiced.
❖ He claims that the actual practice of the Caste system is contrary to the tenets of the
shastras. The number of castes is infinite & not four.
❖ As a remedy, he proposes fusion of castes into four big castes to resurrect the ancient
Varna system.
❖ Gandhi upholds Varna system. The basic tenets of Varna system, according to Gandhi,
are:
(i) Division of varna is based on birth.
(ii) Varna system does not deny education to the Shudra. A Shudra can acquire
knowledge of the shastras or learn military art. However, one cannot earn one’s living
through these. This is applicable to all the varnas.
(iii) Varna system determines the mode of earning a living. One must follow the
occupation of the varna to which one belongs.
(iv) Varna system prevents competition, class struggle and class war. The duties and
occupations of people are fixed.
(v) Varna determines the occupation prior to the birth.
❖ The critics observe that Gandhi’s views with regard to caste or varna is against the
essence of democracy, since caste & varna promote inequality and injustice. The idea
of varna is the parent idea of the caste. Thus, caste as well as varna are equally
pernicious, it makes no difference whether one believes in varna or in caste.
❖ However, Gandhi does oppose unjust social and economic structure of the Caste
system and the practice of untouchability.
❖ Gandhi says, “Untouchability is a crime against God & humanity”. He calls the
untouchables- ‘Harijan’, ‘Children of God’.
❖ Gandhi contests the dishonour & disgrace with which the untouchables are treated.
Page | 8
❖ Gandhi maintains that the occupation of the untouchables is as good as any other. To
set an example, Gandhi asks every resident of his Sabarmati ashram to clean the toilets.
❖ Under his guidance, the Congress passes a motion, declaring the work of sweepers as
respectable.
❖ In his journal, Young India, he writes many articles to critique the practice of
untouchability.
❖ Gandhi considers untouchability as a sin, as corruption of Hinduism.
❖ He declares that if he has to be reborn, he would like to be reborn among the
untouchables to share their suffering and to rescue them from miserable condition.
❖ Gandhi emphasises on the religious dimension of untouchability, like the access to
temples.
❖ The critics argue that Gandhi never demands social equality for the untouchables.
❖ Gandhi supports Vaikom Satyagrah. He interacts with the local Brahmins and is
anguished to see their unrelenting attitude. Gandhi supports the untouchables’ entry to
temples, since, for him, equality before God is a priority. However, he wants to attain
this without upsetting the upper castes.
❖ Gandhi’s initiatives transform the hearts of many Congress leaders. In 1922 at Bardoli,
Gujarat, the Congress passes a resolution whereby all the activists are called upon to
help the untouchables. However, due to the scarcity of funds, the committee could not
function.
❖ Around 1940s, Gandhi challenges caste directly by promoting inter-caste-marriages.
❖ Gandhi faces severe criticisms from the orthodox Hindus, for promoting the
untouchables’ entry to temples & inter-caste-marriages. Gandhi is shown black flags on
numerous occasions. Such instances mellow down Ambedkar’s views towards Gandhi
and he appreciates Gandhi’s public declarations concerning untouchables.

Ambedkar
❖ Ambedkar has critically examined the institution of caste and its impact on social
relations. He ascribes most of the evils of Hinduism to this institution and calls for its
annihilation.
❖ He says, “Hinduism is a veritable chamber of horrors and it must die for caste to
vanish.”
❖ Ambedkar experiences caste discrimination right from his childhood.
❖ He had to sit on the floor in one corner of the classroom, the teachers would not touch
his notebooks.
❖ Ambedkar claims that the members of the governing class in India are conscious of the
fact that they belong to the governing class and that they alone are destined to rule.
❖ In “Caste, Class and Democracy”, Ambedkar points out that some people are of the
view that servile class are contemptible, they must remain servile and must never aspire
to rule.
❖ Ambedkar claims that caste chauvinism is inimical to the servile classes. This inherent
sense of superiority is termed as ‘Brahminism’ by him. He enumerates the following
principles of Brahminism:
(i) Graded inequality among the castes
(ii) Disarmament of the Shudras & the untouchables.
(iii) Prohibition of education for the Shudras & the untouchables.
(iv) Prohibition to acquire property for the Shudras & the untouchables.
(v) Prohibition to occupy positions of power & authority for the Shudras & the
untouchables.
❖ ‘Brahminism’ does not refer to Brahmin, the caste or community. Anti-caste movement
Page | 9
 prefers ‘Brahminism’ over ‘Hinduism’. ‘Brahminism’ implies ‘domino effect’,
Ambedkar calls it ‘infection of imitation’. Ambedkar says, “Brahminism is the very
negation of the spirit of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”.
❖ Ambedkar argues that the divisions of caste & untouchability do not let the Hindus
come together as a community.
❖ Ambedkar argues that ‘Caste’ is defined as a social group that has belief in the Hindu
religion and that upholds regulations regarding marriage, food and occupation. Caste
must remain endogamous, there can be no inter-caste marriage between different
castes. There can be no inter-caste dining, one must not take food from, or dine with, a
person from different caste. A person must follow the traditional occupation of one’s
own caste. If a caste has no prescribed occupation, then one should follow the
occupation of one’s father.
❖ The status of a person is determined by the status of one’s caste. As a Hindu, one
cannot change one’s status because one cannot change one’s caste.
❖ Ambedkar claims that the evils, such as Sati, child-marriage, prohibition on widow
remarriage etc., are the outcomes of caste.
❖ Ambedkar argues that the formation of caste is based on the process of imitation. The
castes that were nearest to the Brahmins, imitated all their customs. The castes that
were less near, imitated widowhood & child-marriage. Castes, who were a little farther,
imitated girl-marriage alone and those, who were farthest, imitated only the belief in
the caste principle.
❖ Ambedkar maintains that the supporters of the caste system, equate it with the division
of labour. But Ambedkar argues that the caste system is not merely a division of
labour, but it is, also, a division of labourers. Caste system has created a hierarchy,
labourers are graded one above another. Moreover, the division of labour is not based
on natural aptitudes.
❖ Caste system prescribes tasks to individuals on the basis of the social status of the
parents, and not on the basis of individual’s merit and competence. Some people offer
biological justifications to defend the caste system. They claim that the caste system
preserves the purity of race and the purity of blood.
❖ Ambedkar cites the views of the ethnologists, who maintain that people of Pure Race
exist nowhere, and all the races have been mixed together in all parts of the world.
❖ Ambedkar believes that caste undermines economic efficiency. Caste has disorganized
and demoralised the Hindus.
❖ Ambedkar argues that Hindu society is a myth. The name ‘Hindu’ is itself a foreign
name. Hindu society as such does not exist, it is only a collection of castes. These
castes do not even form a federation. Caste system has prevented Hindus from
becoming a society with a unified life and a consciousness of its own being.
❖ Ambedkar claims that caste is inconsistent with conversion. The law of caste confines
its membership to people born in that caste. Caste has killed public spirit. Caste has
made public opinion impossible.
❖ Ambedkar envisages an ideal society as one where Liberty, Equality & Fraternity
prevail.
❖ Ambedkar claims that the annihilation of caste is the only way forward, unless the
social order is not changed, there can be no progression. Morality and Nation cannot be
built on the foundation of caste, anything that is based on caste is bound to crack.
❖ Ambedkar proposes inter-caste marriages as the remedy of caste-based discrimination,
this is the most potent means to annihilate caste. He believes that the blind belief in the
prevalent interpretations of the Shastras be destroyed.
❖ Ambedkar is eventually appalled to realise that he could not transform the existing
practice of Hindu caste system, and the Dalits are not treated equally and with respect.
Page | 10
 Ambedkar develops respect for the Buddhism, since it promotes an egalitarian social
order, it respects humanity, does not approve exploitation of human by the human and
does not permit birth-based supremacy of one over another. Ambedkar appreciates the
rational character of the Buddhism.

Untouchability
❖ Ambedkar distinguishes between Caste & Untouchability, however he admits that the
caste reinforces untouchability.
❖ Ambedkar defines Caste as an endogamous unit, an enclosed class, which has
ascending scale of reverence and a descending scale of contempt.
❖ Untouchables were not allowed to use public roads, to drink from common wells, to
enter temples, to attend privileged-caste schools or to cover upper bodies. Mahars had
to tie brooms to their waists to sweep away their polluted foot-prints. Others had to
hang spittoons around their necks to collect their polluted saliva.
❖ Privileged-caste men had rights over the bodies of untouchable women.
❖ People born into the lowest castes are supposedly being punished for the sinful acts of
past lives.
❖ Ambedkar observes that there cannot be a more degrading system of social
organisation than the caste system.
❖ Ambedkar uses the Marathi word ‘Dalit’(Broken People) for the untouchables to
represent their plight.
❖ Ambedkar maintains that untouchability can be difficult for the outsiders to understand.
He states that the colonial administration does nothing to improve the lot of the
untouchables.
❖ Ambedkar claims that untouchables themselves have to fight their battle. Those who
are genuinely concerned about their plights, should help them in concrete ways than
merely do the lip service.
❖ Ambedkar maintains that in spite of the differences, all the untouchables have common
disadvantages and they all are ill-treated by the caste-hindus. They live in ghettoes,
they are universally condemned and pushed to the margins.
❖ Ambedkar does not approve Gandhi’s efforts of removing untouchability. Ambedkar
terms Gandhian attempts as mere façade, as attempts to placate the untouchables.
❖ He exhorts the untouchables to be mindful, and not to get trapped by the overt
kindness. He asks them to fight for the political empowerment.
❖ Ambedkar seeks recognition of the untouchables as a separate element. He claims that
the Muslims & the Sikhs are recognised as distinct communities by the Colonial
administration and Gandhi, but not the untouchables. He seeks appropriate
Constitutional safeguards for the Dalits.

Gandhi & Ambedkar

❖ Gandhi argues that Ambedkar cites the texts of doubtful credentials & authenticity.
Gandhi believes that the institutions of Varna & Ashram have nothing to do with Caste.
❖ Gandhi maintains that the law of Varna implies that one should earn one’s bread
through ancestral calling. It prescribes duties rather than define our rights. Thus, it can
pave the path to attain the welfare of humanity.
❖ Gandhi maintains that caste system has a wonderful power of organisation. Caste
represents the genius of Indian society.
❖ In Navjivan, he writes, “If Hindu society has been able to stand, it is because it is
founded on the caste system. The principle of hereditary occupation is the soul of the
Page | 11
 caste system. It will be chaos if everyday a Brahmin is changed into a Shudra and a
Shudra is to be changed into a Brahmin.”
❖ Gandhi is an admirer of the caste system. But he asserts that there should be no
hierarchy between castes. All castes should be considered equal. The avarna-castes, the
ati-shudras, should be brought into the varna system.
❖ Ambedkar’s response is that the outcaste is a bye-product of the caste system. There
will be outcastes as long as there are castes. Nothing can emancipate the outcastes,
except the destruction of the caste system.
❖ Annihilation of Caste is characterised as Ambedkar’s utopia. Ambedkar claims that
caste is institutionalised injustice.
❖ Ambedkar claims that it is of no significance to tell people that the Shastras do not
endorse caste. What is of importance is the way people interpret the Shastras. Like the
Buddha and Nanak, we must discard the Shastras and deny their authority. What is
wrong with Hindu, is the sacredness of caste. Gandhi retorts that Ambedkar throws the
baby out with the bathwater.
❖ Gandhi believes in the varna system. Like the Arya-Samaj, Gandhi suggests that a
person’s varna should be determined by one’s worth and not by birth.
❖ Ambedkar asks, “How are you going to compel people who have acquired a higher
status based on birth, without reference to their worth, to vacate that status?”. And,
“What would happen to women, whether their status would be decided upon by their
own worth or their husbands’ worth?”
❖ Gandhi contests Ambedkar’s analysis of Hinduism. Gandhi argues that a religion
should be judged by its strong points and best specimens, and not by its distorted and
worst components. He asks, how can a religion, professed by Chaitanya, Gyandeo,
Vivekananda & others, be completely devoid of merit?
❖ Ambedkar rebuts all arguments of Gandhi. With regard to the authenticity of the texts,
that Ambedkar quotes in his writings, Ambedkar submits that he does not claim to be
an authority, but the texts in question are those that have been referred by Tilak. And
Tilak is a well-recognised authority on the Hindu-shastras. Ambedkar claims that to
believe in the Hindu-shastras and to regard oneself as liberal or moderate is a
contradiction in terms.
❖ With regard to ‘ancestral calling’, Ambedkar argues that there is no point in following
one’s ancestral calling if it does not suit one’s capacities and aspirations, or if it is not
profitable. Ambedkar makes a personal reference to Gandhi as well, he claims that
Gandhi has never touched his own ancestral calling- trading.
❖ On the issue of ‘Saints’, Ambedkar submits that the eminent saints have never
undertaken a campaign against caste or untouchability. They have not expressed
concerns about the despair and struggles of people. They have emphasised on the
relation between man and God. They have not asserted that all humans are born equal.
They only state that all humans are equal in the eyes of the God.
❖ Both, Gandhi & Ambedkar, propose a holistic socio-economic-political transformation
of Hindu society. They both critique caste-based exploitation and discrimination.
However, they differ with regard to the strategies and instruments.
❖ The Poona pact, 1932, creates irresolvable differences between Gandhi & Ambedkar.
Ambedkar advocates separate electorate for Dalits. Gandhi proposes reservation of
seats, and for its enforcement Gandhi proceeds on fast. Ambedkar eventually accepts
Gandhi’s proposal.
❖ Gandhi believes that the liberation of India from the foreign rule is paramount, it
requires unity of all Indians, irrespective of caste & creed. Thus, he seeks cooperation
of Ambedkar in this regard.
Page | 12
❖ Ambedkar believes that the liberation, in true sense of the term, implies liberation of
humanity from oppression and exploitation. Freedom struggle, that does not cater to the
aspirations of deprived classes, is of no significance. Moral timber & political
dynamism of a society shall be measured from the morale of the lowest class.
Ambedkar asserts that the cause he is espousing is a national cause.
❖ Ambedkar has to confront two powerful opponents- the Britishers & Savarna
exploiters. Because of the priority of social reforms, Ambedkar engages in tactical
alliance with the Britishers also, he claims that their presence check caste Hindu
oppressors.
❖ Although Ambedkar fights and contests Gandhi on several issues, but they both share a
number of concerns in common.
❖ Ambedkar emphasises on Constitutional-Morality, and not on the traditional, social-
morality of the caste system.
❖ In the Constituent Assembly, 1948, Ambedkar states that Constitutional-Morality is not
a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to
learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil which is essentially
undemocratic.
❖ For Ambedkar, Constitution is a work in progress. He observes, like Thomas Jefferson,
that unless every generation has the right to create a new constitution for itself, the
Earth would belong to the dead and not the living.
❖ Hindu Code Bill of Ambedkar sanctions Divorce & expands the Property Rights of
widows and daughters. However, the Bill is blocked and Ambedkar resigns as the Law
Minister. In his resignation speech, Ambedkar says, “To leave inequality between class
& class, between sex & sex, which is the soul of Hindu society, and to go on passing
legislation relating to economic problems is to make a farce of our Constitution and to
build a palace on a dung heap”.

The Problem of Caste: The Background

❖ Some scholars claim that the origin of the caste system is rooted in the Purusha Sukta
of the Rig-Veda. The Purusha Sukta equates the first three castes with the limbs of the
creator: the Brahmana is His mouth, the Rajanya or Kshatriya is His arms and the
Vaishya is His thighs. But the Sudra is His feet. Thus, the Sudras are given an inferior
status. However, many eminent scholars challenge this claim. They argue that in the
Rig-Veda, Varna means Colour not Caste, the caste system was unknown in the Rig-
Vedic Age. In the Rig-Veda, ‘Brahmana’ does not mean caste, it refers to ‘virtue &
intellect’. They claim that Caste as hereditary institution was not there in the Rig-Vedic
period.
❖ Caste is questioned, for the first time, by the Buddhists. In the South India,
Veershaivas, like Basava, challenged caste in the 12th Century. Bhakti Poet-Saints, like
Chokhamela, Ravidas, Kabir, Tukaram, Mira, Janabai & others, have critiqued caste as
well.
❖ Other prominent crusaders for the annihilation of caste: Jotiba Phule, Savitri Phule,
Pandita Rama Bai, Swami Achhutanand Harihar, Ayyankali, Sree Narayan Guru,
Iyothee Thass, E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (Periyar), Jogendranath Mandal, Babu Mangu
Ram, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Dayanand Saraswati & Swami Vivekananda.
❖ Veershaivism is a revived, regenerated and revolutionized form of Shaivism. The
decadence of Shaivism starts in the beginning of 12th century, but Basava rescues
Shaivism from its decadence by the mid-12th century. He discards Varna-ashram and
renews Shaivism as Veershaivism. Basava is a great saint, philosopher, religious
teacher and a social reformer. Dr. Radhakrishnan writes, “Basava gave to
Page | 13
 Veerashaivism a prophetic turn and a popular appeal.” A Veershaiva is also called
Lingavanta or Lingayata.
Basava tries to be the voice of the poor and downtrodden. He claims that the roots of
social life are embedded not in the cream of the society but in the scum of the society.
He promotes the spirit of democracy by emphasising on the well-being of deprived
section. He claims that the caste system is the negation of democratic principles. His
conception of social democracy suggests that one becomes great, not by the birth but
by the worth. Everyone should be given social rights with dignity. Basava tries to
introduce reform in the prevalent practice of Hinduism, by questioning social evils and
integrating high and low. He upholds the dignity of manual labour, he proclaims ‘work
is worship’. For him, everyone is a labourer, some are intellectual and others are
manual labourers. He plays instrumental role in the promotion of arts and crafts.
Basava’s conception of social reform, also, include the elevation and independence of
womanhood. Through Anubhava Mantapa, Basava initiates a movement to eliminate
caste-discrimination, untouchability and religious dogmas.

❖ Chokhamela, 14th century saint, belongs to the untouchable Mahar caste. A devotee
of Lord Vitthala and a disciple of Namdev, the great saint poet. He is one of the earliest
low-caste poets. He writes Abhangas. ‘Abir Gulal Udhlit Rang’ is one of the famous
Abhangas.

❖ Ravidas (Raidas) is a 15-16th century mystic poet-saint of the bhakti movement. He

questions caste and gender based social divisions. He refutes the claim that caste plays
a pivotal role in one’s relationship to God. For him, everyone is equal, in relation to
God. Through his poems and songs, he proposes an egalitarian framework of society.
He envisages Begumpura, a land without sorrow, where there is no suffering or fear,
and all are equal. Many of his poems are included in Adi Granth, the sacred scripture of
Sikhism. It is maintained that Ravidas has met Nanak, the first guru and the founder of
Sikhism. Ravidas is a disciple of Ramananda, a contemporary of Kabir and the guru of
Mirabai. Ravidas is critical of Saguna conception of Supreme Being and professes
Nirguna conception.

❖ Kabir is a 15th century mystic & poet. His verses have influenced Bhakti movement.
Sikh scriptures have incorporated his teachings. Kabir is critical of meaningless and
unethical religious practices. He asserts that Truth can be discovered by renouncing ‘I’,
the ego. He is a proponent of ‘critical thinking’ and ‘constructive criticism.’ He
envisages Premnagar, the City of Love, as a casteless, classless and discrimination free
life.

❖ Tukaram is a 17th century Marathi poet. He is an eminent sant of Bhakti movement.

He repudiates caste-based pride. For him, caste does not matter, in the service of God,
only Love for God is important. He envisages an egalitarian world-order in the form of
Pandharpur. He questions evil, meaningless rituals, injustice and wrongdoings of
society through devotional poetry- Abhang & Kirtan.

❖ Mira Bai is an eminent poet & mystic of 16th century. She is an ardent devotee of
Krishna. She belongs to Bhakti tradition, she expresses her love for God through the
analogy of human relations in her poems. She questions feudal social conventions and
discriminatory practices. She is the epitome of human suffering and endurance. Her
tenacity, resolve and pursuit of freedom through love and devotion, are remarkable and
inspirational to common people.
Page | 14
❖ Janabai is a revered Marathi poet of 13th century. She has been deprived of basic
schooling and education because of her caste, yet she metamorphoses herself as a
wordsmith through devotion and earnestness. She has been a caregiver of Namdev.
Namdev professes equality of all before God, he questions caste and gender-based
discrimination through his verses.

❖ Jotirao Govindrao Phule (1827-1890), popularly known as Jotiba Phule is born in

Pune. He belongs to the Mali (Gardener) caste. He is married to Savitribai at a young
age. Jotiba learns English and reads books like “Rights of Man” by Thomas Paine. He
devotes his life to Social work and for the empowerment of the, so called, Shudras &
women. He is one of the first reformer to take up the issues of Gender with the plight
of the, so called, Untouchables.

He regards Education as the instrument to liberate oppressed class from the birth-based
enslavement. He proclaims: Without education wisdom was lost; without wisdom
morals were lost; without morals development was lost; without development wealth
was lost; without wealth the shudras were ruined; so much has happened through lack
of education.
He starts a new religion- Sarvajanik Satya Dharma, which is based on truth & equality,
and is free from superstition & bigotry. To propagate his new religion, he starts Satya
Shodhak Samaj (Society for Finding Truth). He is a prolific author, Gulam-giri is a
very popular work. He is honoured with the title – ‘Mahatma.’

He teaches Savitribai (03.01.1831 - 10.03.1897), his wife, and they open schools for
the girls. They put special emphasis on the education of the girls from the marginalised
and minorities sections. Their revolutionary steps are opposed and challenged by the
privileged class, and they are forced to leave parental house. They believe that the girls,
from every background, are like the shudras. Customs, like polygamy, child-marriage
and widowhood make their lives miserable. They start the first Native Library for the
low-caste, start a night school for adults and start an orphanage, where widows of all
castes could live with dignity.
❖ Fatima Sheikh (09.01.1831 - 09.10.1900) is a pioneering Muslim woman educator,
ant-caste activist, proponent of girls’ education and a social reformer from
Maharashtra. She works in collaboration with Jotirao Phule and Savitribai. Fatima
Sheikh & Savitribai, befriend each other at a Teachers’ Training Programme organized
by American Missionary Cynthia Farrar. In 1848, Savitribai, Fatima and Jotirao open
the first school for girls, inside the premises of Fatima’s home in Pune, against all odds
and violent opposition. They also start schools for Dalits and women. They face severe
opposition from conservative groups. The two women are often attacked with stones
and dung. Fatima faces the wrath of upper caste Hindus and orthodox Muslims.
Jotirao’s father is forced to evict Savitribai & Jotirao from the family home, but Fatima
Sheikh & her brother stand with the Phules and they continue to educate girls &
Bahujans unabatedly. While Phules leave behind a treasure trove of literature, personal
diaries, notes, letters, poems and books, there is no such documents available to know
about Fatima Sheikh. However, it is indisputable that she courageously stands against
regressive attitudes towards women & downtrodden.

❖ Pandita Ramabai (1858-1922) is a pre-eminent social reformer. She contests dogmas,

prejudices and discriminations that are based on birth- sex, caste & religion. She
champions the cause of educating women. She is regarded as one of the earliest Indian
Page | 15
 feminists. Calcutta University bestows upon her the titles of ‘Pandita’ & ‘Saraswati’ to
honour her erudition. She questions the prevalent oppressive beliefs of Hinduism and
converts to Christianity. But she remains a critical Christian. She questions all those
beliefs of Christianity that are uncritical.
The story of her life is so inspirational. She becomes an orphan at a young age and goes
through so much hardships. Marries outside her caste and becomes a widow soon after.
But, not only, she endures everything, and tenaciously evolves as an independent
woman and a single mother to her daughter, Manorama. At the same time, she
transforms the lives of outcaste children, child-widows, orphans and destitute women
as a saint-like self-sacrificing mother.

❖ Iyothee Thass (1845-1914) is an eminent Tamil social-activist. He questions Varna-

system & the discrimination, oppression and marginalisation of the, so called,
untouchables. He establishes ‘Dravida Mahajana Sabha’, and during 1891 census,
urges oppressed class people to register themselves as ‘Casteless Dravidians’ and not
as Hindus. He emphasises on the rights of the, so called, untouchables to enter religious
institutions, to have free education and to have ownership over the land. He is one of
the earliest social-activist to embrace Buddhism. He emphasises more on social &
economic transformation than political transformation. He envisages a casteless &
classless society. He maintains that the divisive & oppressive caste-system is
antithetical to the spirit of nationalism.

❖ Ayyankali (1863-1941) is a well-known social reformer & revolutionary, from the

Princely State of Travancore. He challenges social-divisions, slavery and oppressive
discriminations. He resolutely works to improve the plight of deprived and oppressed
class. He strives to restructure socio-political spheres to educate & empower the
oppressed class, the, so called, untouchables. He is illiterate but understands that
access to education is the basic right of every child, including so called untouchables.
He questions the conventional stricture, whereby women from the oppressed class are
prohibited from covering their upper body, and successfully establishes their ‘right to
self-dignity’. As a revolutionary, he challenges the marginalisation of the oppressed
class and strives to reclaim public space & road. He is also called ‘Spartacus of
Kerala’.

❖ Swami Achhutanand Harihar (1879-1933) is a philosopher-poet, playwright, social

reformer and the founder of Adi Hindu Movement. He is from a village of Uttar
Pradesh. He is a polyglot, knows – Hindi, Urdu, English, Sanskrit, Persian, Marathi,
Bengali & Punjabi. He maintains that, so called, Dalits are the original inhabitants of
India. He disapproves the term ‘Harijan’ to refer to untouchables. He is one of the
pioneers of Dalit Literature in Hindi. To spread awareness among, so called, Depressed
Classes, he starts his own publications. He names his first monthly paper- ‘Achhut’. He
supports Dr. B. R. Ambedkar.

❖ Shree Narayan Guru (1856-1928) is a Hindu saint, a social-reformer & a spiritual

wanderer, from Kerala. He is known as Gurudevan. He revolts against caste-system &
emphasises on progressive values, namely, Justice, Freedom, Social-equality. His
erudition & poetic prowess are par-excellence. He is revered for his knowledge of
Veda & Upanishad. He lays down spiritual foundation for social reform &
transformation. He refutes Chaturvarna and prescribes establishment of Educational &
Religious institutions for the upliftment & empowerment of the marginalised sections.

Page | 16
 With regard to Caste-system & conversion, Gandhi maintains that the Caste-Hindus
and the low Caste-Hindus are both the sons of Hinduism. The Caste-Hindu is the elder
brother who shoulders responsibility, and he therefore exercises certain privileges. The
low Caste-Hindu is his younger brother who is to be cared for. If the elder brother turns
out to be somewhat rough and aggressive that should not make the younger brother a
runaway from his mother Hinduism. Shree Narayan Guru does not agree with Gandhi
on this, he expressed tolerance for the conversions and maintains that one should
follow what one truly believes in. For Gurudevan, Caste is the basis of soci-economic
divisions and disparities.

❖ E.V. Ramaswami (1879-1973) is a thinker-organizer-reformer. He is critical of

religious texts, caste-distinctions, untouchability and Hindu orthodoxy. Born in Erode,
he is a Kannada-speaking Naicker. E.V.R.is a theist, but he becomes an atheist after his
visit to Banaras. He joins Congress Party, promotes homespun cloth, swadeshi,
eradication of untouchability, temple entry for the Untouchables & freedom of the
country. In 1920, under the guidance of Gandhi, joins the Non-Cooperation Movement.
In 1924, he actively participates in Vaikom Satyagraha. The prevalent caste system
denies entry of low caste Hindus into temples. E.V.R. emerges as the ‘Vaikom Hero’,
depressed class people walk the roads leading to the Mahadevar temple. However, he
thinks that the Congress is insensitive to the cause of the, so called, lower castes. He is
appalled to know that a Congress-run-hostel serves food separately to Brahmin and
non-Brahmin students. Around 1925, he leaves the Congress.

Ramaswami launches Self Respect Movement to uphold the cause of low caste
downtrodden. He asserts that oppressed castes & regions must regain and reassert their
self-respect, they should take control of their own affairs and remove social inequality,
untouchability, manual scavenging and oppression of children & women. A great
Tamil orator & a rationalist, he runs several political magazines. He is popularly
known as ‘Periyar’ (The Great One/Soul) from the 1930s. He promotes atheism,
women’s rights and contraception. He opposes the imposition of Hindi in south India.
He is critical of religious orthodoxy and caste-chauvinism. In 1944, he forms his own
party- Dravida Kazhagam. He envisages Dravida Nadu- a sovereign nation-state in
south India.

❖ Jogendra Nath Mandal (1904-1968) is from the Barisal District of Bengal

Presidency, the present Bangladesh. He belongs to the Namasudra Community, he
questions the unjust and oppressive structure of society that subjugates and humiliates
the people of his community. He dedicates his life to empower the oppressed class. He
is influenced by Subhas Chandra Bose and Sarat Chandra Bose. He is a follower of Dr.
Babasaheb Ambedkar and plays a pivotal role in the election of Ambedkar to the
Constituent Assembly from Bengal. However, he joins Muslim League. He claims that
the Dalits can have cordial relation with the Muslims than with the high caste Hindus,
hence he supports Muslim League. He is one of the founding fathers of Pakistan. He is
appointed as Pakistan’s first Minister for Law and Labour. But Mandal is disillusioned
when Muslim rioters commit atrocities against the, so called, Dalits with the support of
the police. Mandal develops irreconcilable differences with the Pakistani Prime
Minister, Liaquat Ali Khan. Because of the inaction against the rioters, social injustice
and biased attitude towards non-Muslim minorities, Mandal resigns from his post and
comes back to India.

❖ Mangu Ram (1886-1980) is popularly known as Babu Mangu Ram Chaudhary. He is

Page | 17
 a freedom fighter. He opposes untouchability and works for the equality of
Untouchables through Ad-Dharmi Movement.
As a student, he faces discrimination in the school. He is not allowed to enter the
classroom, he listens to the lectures through the windows. In 1909, he goes to the
United States and joins Ghadar Party. In 1925, he comes back to India and starts to
teach in a school of his native village. He names this school Ad Dharm School and
launches Ad Dharam Movement from here. The movement questions the subjugation
of, so called, Dalits. Babu Mangu Ram pioneers Dalit movement through the Ad
Dharm Movement. He awakens the, so called, Untouchables and urges them to realise
their intrinsic worth.
Stoics
❖ A group of Greek thinkers would assemble at a designated platform, Porch, (Stoa),
thus, the thinkers are called Stoics. Stoics maintain that the Universe is under the
control of a Universal Rational Law, and every event of the world is like an effect of
that Law, which is the cause of everything. There is complete determinism, and as
humans we cannot change the course of events. Zeno, of Citium (336-265 BCE), is
the founder, other important exponents are Cleanthes (331-232 BCE) and
Chrysippus (280-205 BCE).
❖ But if everything is determined then how can one answer the fundamental question-
What ought I to do? Stoics suggest that one shall try to do what one thinks one
should be doing. However, one should not get affected by the outcome in a negative
way. For instance, if one observes that one’s child is drowning, then one should try
one’s best to rescue the child. But, if despite one’s best efforts one does not succeed
in the rescue act then one should remain stoical, rather than get impacted by the
outcome. To be stoical is to have endurance, to accept misfortune without any
complaint.
❖ Stoics claim that one ought to seek happiness. But happiness implies a state of
indifference, an orientation where one remains detached from the outcome.
❖ Stoics believe in a cosmos, guided by reason. Happiness is to live in accordance
with nature. Duty of an individual is to promote the well-being of everyone, to act as
a citizen of the world. Thus, determinism and morality are compatible.
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860 CE)
❖ He is a 19 century German thinker. He is not only well versed with the teachings of
th

Western thinkers but he is equally informed about the Indian traditions. He is

immensely inspired by the teachings of the Buddha.
❖ Kant maintains that humans have personal rational will, whereby we can formulate
Moral Duties on the lines of the Natural Law. Schopenhauer observes that Kant is
mistaken about the nature of will and its relation to humans. For Schopenhauer, the
will is not personal, the will is impersonal. Moreover, it is not the humans who
control the will, rather it is the other way round. The Impersonal Will is the Cosmic
Will, it governs each and every episode of our lives.
❖ As humans, we cannot alter the course of life. The state of affairs that appear
sorrowful to one, cannot be changed by the individual. Thus, the engulfing suffering
is imminent and inevitable. Accordingly, the critics characterize Schopenhauer’s
Page | 18
 view as pessimistic, since humans are driven by a cosmic will and not by personal
reason. But that is not the right assessment of his position. Schopenhauer claims that
the suffering can be annihilated by transforming orientation.
❖ Schopenhauer prescribes two paths to escape the misery of life: 1. Temporary
respite may come through artistic pursuits. 2. The lasting solution can come through
ethical way of life.
❖ The root cause of suffering is ego-centric outlook towards the life. By cultivating
impersonal, inclusive & universal outlook, one can escape the suffering &
pessimism.
❖ For Schopenhauer, ethical life is not about performing specific duties. A true moral
person does not act out of duty or reason. One does not distinguish between oneself
and others. To be ethical is to fill one’s heart with universal love and compassion.
One shall stive to injure no one and to help everyone, in whatever way one can. By
cultivating a sense of universal fraternity, we can collectively overcome all our
suffering. One suffers primarily because of one’s myopic perspective. One has to
cognize the oneness of the Will in all its manifestations.
Rights
❖ Rights are integral to individual’s good life and social welfare. The important
meanings of ‘rights’ are- ‘claims’, ‘liberties’, ‘powers’ and ‘immunities’. In popular
sense, rights are justified claims.
❖ Rights are classified by their specific sources. Thus, we can have Natural rights,
Moral rights, Human rights, Legal rights, Fundamental rights, Political rights and
Civil rights. Similarly, we can talk about Women’s rights, Children’s rights, Dalit’s
rights, Minorities’ rights, Patient’s rights, Animal rights and so on.
❖ Natural Rights: Natural Rights are derived from Natural law. They are not created
by any agency or institution, for example- Right to Life. Hobbes, Locke and
Rousseau maintain that humans have natural rights even before the origin of the
state. For theists, natural rights are the Divine Rights.
❖ Moral Rights: As a human, one is a moral being. As a moral agent, one owns
oneself and has a right over oneself. One is autonomous, one has the right to make
choices and is responsible for the consequences of one’s actions. Moral Rights can
be equated with Natural Rights, that is, even in the state of nature these rights should
be respected. The conception of Moral Rights suggests that in the case of a conflict
between morality & the legal law, the moral law should prevail & the conflict
should be resolved by legal reform. It implies that it is not right to kill one person to
save the lives of others. The Moral Rights tradition has its roots in Greek Stoic
thinkers, like Chrysippus (280-205 BCE). Other prominent advocates are Grotius
(1583-1645 CE), Locke (1632-1704 CE) & Robert Nozick (1938-2002 CE).
❖ Human Rights: An individual possesses Human Rights by virtue of being human.
Human Rights are natural rights, they are independent of, and prior to, institutions.
However, Human Rights have been incorporated into legal system through
institutional arrangements. Basic Human Rights are- Right to Life, Right to a Fair
Trial & Right not to be Enslaved. The International Bill of Rights states: All human
Page | 19
 beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
Important features of Human Rights: 1. They are universal and inalienable. 2. They
emphasise more on the interaction between the government and individual, by
prescribing dos & don’ts. 3. Human Rights shall take precedence & shall never be
ignored even in the cases where society can benefit.
Human Rights are essentially Moral Rights, since Human Rights are entitlements
that human beings ought to have because they are humans.
Criticism: 1. It is argued that Human Rights give primacy to the individual over the
society. For instance, Marx maintains that the concept of Human Rights is inherently
individualistic and egoistic. 2. According to the legal positivist, the only Human
Rights are actual legal rights. According to Bentham, Human Rights, outside the
legal law, are non-sense on the stilts.
❖ Rights & Duties: Rights and Duties can be understood as correlatives. Ordinarily,
every right brings an obligation with it. For example, if we have a right to free
speech, then the state has a duty to allow us to speak.

Gender Discrimination
Women have not been recognized as equal to men since time immemorial. They have been
subjugated and discriminated, across societies & cultures. The structure of human society
has remained androcentric. That is, men have occupied the central position while women
have been pushed to the periphery. Men are regarded as the ends, but women are treated as
the means. Women are often referred as ‘Second Sex’, because of their secondary status in
all aspects of human life. Women are paid less than their male counterparts. Misogyny is
the root cause of gender discrimination resulting into oppression and injustice towards
women. Gender discrimination is not only subjugation of women but is also an obstacle to
human development.
Women have not been recognised as equal to men even by great philosophers and thinkers.
Several eminent moral thinkers have denigrated their position. Athenian women remained
children, they were always under the guardianship of a male. She was not eligible for
education. Democritus states ‘Let a woman not develop her reason, for that would be a
terrible thing’. Women were married the moment they reached puberty, often to old men.
The husband was asked not to educate his wife: ‘He who teaches letters to his wife is ill
advised, he is giving additional poison to a snake.’ A father had the right to sell his
unmarried daughter into slavery if she lost her virginity before marriage.
Some scholars regard Plato as the first feminist, since Plato, in The Republic, advocates that
women should receive the same education as men. However, Plato equates man with
spirituality and woman with carnal appetites. For him, the love of men for men is pure and
higher than the love of men for women, which is like animal lust. Critics claim that in
Plato’s writings women are not allowed to remain themselves, they are denied the full range
of their sexuality. Women have to become honorary men. In The Republic, Socrates
observes that the natural enemies of the Greeks are the barbarians, just as women are natural
enemies of men.
Aristotle has expressed his misogyny more explicitly. For him, women are inferior and it is
Page | 20
evident from the fact that they don’t become bald, they are childlike. He also claims that
women have fewer teeth than men. Thus, the male is naturally superior to the female. He
describes female as a mutilated male. He draws analogy between women and slaves,
obedience is natural to them. Thus, he justifies the exclusion of women from political
activity. He believes that virtue of a man and of a woman are not the same. The courage of a
man is shown in commanding and of a woman in obeying.
According to Rousseau, a woman should not be brilliant, a brilliant wife is a plague to her
family. He believed that a woman’s reason is practical and unprincipled. A man’s reason,
on the other hand, is abstract, general and principled. He suggested that women be educated
differently from man and they should be excluded from citizenship. Similarly, Kant
claimed that women only have the ability to sense and not reason. Nietzsche stated that
equal rights for women are evidence of a society in decline.
The discrimination and subordination of women have been justified on the grounds of
biological differences between men and women. Feminists contest this, they argue that there
is no necessary correlation between biological differences and social, economic and
political inequalities between men & women. Feminists distinguish between ‘Sex’ and
‘Gender’. ‘Sex’ refers to biological differences, whereas ‘Gender’ refers to the differences
that are imposed by social norms. As Simone de Beauvoir writes, in ‘The Second Sex’,
“One is not born, but is made a woman”. Feminist anthropologists, like Margaret Mead,
maintain that the conceptions of masculinity and femininity vary across cultures. Sex
differences are rooted in the child rearing practices. From early childhood, boys and girls
are trained in gender specific forms of behaviour. Thus, the difference between the sexes is
not biologically determined, rather culturally determined.
Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development:
Kohlberg claims that children go through a series of stages in their moral development.
According to him, as one moves through the stages, one becomes less self-interested and
more impartial in one’s outlook. The scale has 3 major levels and 6 minor stages:
I. Pre-conventional Level: This is an egoistic level without concern for others.
Stage 1: Here action is regulated by reward and punishment. Also, known as the ethics of
Carrot & Stick.
Stage 2: Here altruistic acts are performed in the anticipation of reciprocity.

II. Conventional Level: It involves altruistic care for others.

Stage 3: Interpersonal relationships are fostered by taking into account the needs of others.
Stage 4: Laws are formulated to promote the cohesiveness of society or group.

III. Post-conventional Level: Here duties are formulated in terms of abstract rules that
transcend cultures and situations.
Stage 5: Here violation of a law is allowed if it results into greater good. Personal
relationship is subordinate to justice.
Stage 6: The highest level which is concerned with rights and justice.

Page | 21
Kohlberg points out that women get stuck at the 3rd stage, they give importance to
interpersonal-relationships rather than justice. He tries to demonstrate this through a thought
experiment:
A man named Heinz, contemplates whether to steal a drug or not, which he cannot afford to
buy, to save the life of his wife. The question is “Should Heinz steal the drug?”. A boy,
Jake, aged 11, suggests that Heinz should steal the drug, since it is reasonable to do. Human
life is precious, it is worth more than the money that the chemist could get. However, a girl,
Amy, aged 11, gives evasive answers. She struggles in answering directly. She says there
could be other ways besides stealing, like borrowing or something. But his wife should not
die either. Kohlberg puts Jake at stage 4-5 but Amy at stage 3.
Carol Gilligan questions Kohlberg’s findings. She argues that Kohlberg’s model is biased
by male thinking, the scale favours abstraction & detachment over care and attachment.
Female way of looking at moral issues can be distinct from the typical male way. But the
female way cannot be termed as a lower stage of moral development.
Care Ethics
Some thinkers differentiate between women’s ethics of care and men’s ethics of justice.
They claim that women’s ethics is characterized by care, nurture, love, values and peace,
whereas men’s ethics is impartial, objective and universal. Thus, care ethics emphasises on
empathy and sympathy. Care ethics suggests that one has greater natural obligations to
those with who one has closer relationships.
For example, if someone’s mother and a stranger are drowning, and one has the time and
capacity to save only one of them. The traditional ethics would regard the situation as tragic
and unfortunate. Justice perspective would transcend personal considerations. That is, life of
every individual is equally precious. But Care ethics would recognise the overridingness of
the obligations towards mother. Mother has nurtured & protected one. She has cultivated
one as a person. Thus, one owes more to the mother. Care ethics makes ethical thinking as
non-abstract as possible, it focuses on the specifics of a situation.
Nell Noddings demonstrates the difference between these two ethics by using the examples
of Abraham and Ceres. Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his son for the sake of principles,
whereas Ceres was prepared to sacrifice any principles for the sake of her child.
Feminists have objected to such bifurcation. Catharine MacKinnon and Joan Tronto pointed
out that such a dichotomy reaffirms the sexist stereotypes of women’s traditional roles.
There is nothing inherent to women, which makes them incapable of rational, universal and
objective sentiments.
Susan Moller Okin attempts to refashion the ethics of justice from a feminist standpoint.
Most feminists suggest that an ethics of care could be made effective only if it is grounded
in justice. They see care and justice as complementary to each other. Susan Moller Okin, in
Justice, Gender and the Family, states that women are systematically disadvantaged in all
areas of life, but equality within the home would make gender equality possible in all other
areas of life. Thus, the feminist perspective on justice implies: elimination of male
domination, equality of rights, bridging the public and the private spheres and creation of
society, culture and politics in non-patriarchal forms. We shall strive to create androgynous
society, an equal opportunity society.
Page | 22
Female Foeticide
Woman have been devalued in innumerable ways, but Female foeticide is the worst form of
misogyny. It is the most inhuman, degraded and horrific act of gender discrimination &
dehumanisation. Female foeticide is an act of killing, an act of violence, where parents abort
a foetus, merely because it would develop into a girl child.
It is a form of female infanticide that has persisted since ancient times. Baby girls have been
throttled, poisoned or drowned in a bucket of water or milk. Female foeticide, or sex-
selective abortion, has grown as a substitute to female infanticide. The root cause of this
unethical & criminal act is patriarchy. Thus, female foeticide is morally untenable &
deplorable.
The gender discrimination has touched nadir in the form of female foeticide. The deeply
entrenched misogyny & male-chauvinism deprive Right to Life to females, even before the
birth. Female foeticide has created serious imbalance in the sex-ratio. The sex ratio in India
is becoming increasingly skewed in the favour of males, especially in 0-6 Age Group. Some
argue that the dismal sex-ratio would augur well for women, since they would be valued
more when they would be lesser in number. But others suggest that this would further
degrade their status, and more stringent control would be imposed on them.
Preference to male child over female child is a manifestation of sexism. Sexism is the
failure to recognise the fundamental rights, like Right to Life, to women. Women shall be
given equal rights with men, by virtue of their common humanity. For example, like men,
women shall also have Right to Education. Women shall also be given special rights,
because of their uniqueness & distinctness from men. For example, Maternity leave.
Parents resort to such unethical & barbaric act due to their imagined differences between the
sexes. The differences that are constructed, that are rooted in dogmatic custom & tradition.
Patriarchal world-view & chauvinistic attitude refuse to acknowledge the intrinsic value of
women & their contribution to humanity. For example, women are considered so valueless
that the prospective husbands are offered dowry for marrying them. Unfortunately, despite
legislative measures the subversion of women continues unabated. Pre-natal test & Female-
foeticide are legally banned, they invite stringent punishments yet they are rampant.
Thus, female foeticide is not merely a legal problem, it is a social disease. Radical
restructuring of social-economic-political institutions and holistic overhauling of the
patriarchal world-view can significantly undermine the subordination of women, in general,
and the female-foeticide, in particular. People need to get rid of the obsession for son and
understand that their lives would be equally fulfilling by having a girl child.

Female foeticide can be eradicated with the help of following measures:

1. Value based education, where education is sought as a way of life through cultivation of
critical-thinking and scientific temper. Customary morality has to be replaced with
reflective morality.

2. Transformation of patriarchal conventions with rational, progressive & humanistic

orientation.
Page | 23
3. Social, Economic, Political & Legal measures to check sex-based discrimination.

4. Ensuring development of quality health care services & universal access to the same.

5. Strong ethical code for the Medical Practitioners.

6. Generation of awareness through media & other organization.

7. Regular appraisal and assessment of the indicators of the status of women, such as sex-
ratio, literacy and economic participation.

8. Stricter imposition of control over clinics that identify the sex of a foetus, and stronger
surveillance of abortions to ensure that they are not performed for the wrong reasons.

9. Stricter implementation of legal laws.

Land and Property Rights

Patriarchal society has denied economic rights to women, throughout history. Lack of
economic independence has remained one of the reasons for the subjugation of women.
They have no independent source of income or ownership over land & property. Thus, the
subordinate position of women in the public sphere, is an extension of their secondary &
dependent position in the private sphere of family.
The prevalent social & legal process of the distribution of land & property have further
perpetuated the gender bias against women. In recent past, legal laws have been amended &
girls have equal legal rights over land and property. However, the implementation of the
law requires a complete transformation of patriarchal framework of the family to a non-
patriarchal framework.
Empowerment
Women empowerment refers to a status of women, where women have complete control
over themselves & their lives, they are recognised as ends rather than means. Empowered
women must be self-reliant and shall take all their decisions autonomously. Thus, an
empowered woman shall have social, economic & political independence.
Women have been subjugated and discriminated, since time immemorial. They are
relegated to the margins, in spite of the fact that they have proven their intrinsic worth &
mettle on a regular basis. They numerically constitute half of the human population, yet
they have no voice of their own. They are deprived of basic rights, like right to life.
Although concerns have been expressed with regard to the plight of women in different
ancient cultures, including Indian, Greece & Chinese. But these concerns could not amend
the subordinate status of women.
In India, from pre-independence era till now, we have had a series of social reform

Page | 24
movements and legislations to upgrade the status of women. The pioneers of social reform
movements, namely, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Ishwar Chand Vidya Sagar, Pandita Rama Bai
& others, have championed the cause of women and have fought against great odds.
Women have been accorded a low status and are considered inferior to men. They have no
identity of their own. Women have been suppressed through various practices, including
early marriage, pardah, ban on widow-remarriage, sati, devadasi, ban on education etc.
Polygamy has remained prevalent in several cultures. The efforts & initiatives of reformers
have resulted into several legislations. However, they could not significantly eradicate the
evil practices, nor could check the suppression of women. Till date, we have not been able
to improve the conditions of women significantly. We have not been able to empower
women in the true sense of the term.
To realise women empowerment, we need to adopt holistic approach. Radical
transformation of social structure with political & legal reforms, can pave the path to
women empowerment.
Feminists characterise social structure as patriarchal. ‘Patriarchy’ literally means ‘Rule by
Father’. Dominance of father within family, symbolises male supremacy in all other
institutions- education, work-place, politics etc. Thus, ‘Patriarchy’ effectively implies ‘Rule
by Men’, within private & public spheres.
Thus, to realise women empowerment, patriarchal structure of human life has to be
restructured in a non-patriarchal form. A radical transformation of social, economic,
political, religious & cultural spheres can be the only way forward. Patriarchal conventions
must be replaced with rational and humanistic notions.
Susan Moller Okin observes that women are systematically disadvantaged in all spheres of
life. But equality within home, can lead to gender equality in all other spheres of life.
Political equality is denied to women on the grounds of sexual, social & economic
inequalities. Redistribution of domestic work and electoral reforms can enhance their
participation and representation in every other area of life. The proposal to reserve 33%
seats for women in the parliament and the legislative assembly can be an important step in
this regard.
The feminists argue that there is a gender bias in the existing democratic framework. To
ensure substantive equality, democratic institutions have to recognize and accommodate
gender differences.

Development
❖ Development is not a static concept. It is a vibrant, dynamic, ever-changing and
ever-evolving concept. It is a continuous process, there can be nothing in absolutely
developed form.
❖ Development is not uni-dimensional. It is a multi-dimensional process.
Development is not confined to Economic development. Development can also be
Social as well as Political. Development can be all inclusive, encompassing every
aspect of human life. Development can primarily be an Ethical concept bereft of all
dogmas, prejudices, patriarchy, misogyny & all kinds of chauvinism.
❖ Development implies growth. Thus, it implies incessant growth of every sphere of
Page | 25
 human life.
❖ Development is connected with technology, in many ways development refers to
technological development.
❖ Rationality is an essential component of development. Traditional and conventional
practices that are unscientific, cannot be regarded as development.
❖ Feminist perspective imparts further distinctness to the notion of Development by
emphasising on the roles, positions and empowerment of women.
❖ In Political development, notions of democratization, accountable government &
human rights have become more important.
❖ The notion of Freedom is integral to the conception of Development. Thus, Right to
self-determination is central to the notion of Development.
❖ Economic dimension is an integral component of Development. It enhances the
range of choice for all the members of society without discrimination.
❖ The United Nations Development Programme offers an exposition of Human
Development that aims to promote not only Material well-being but, also, freedom
& dignity. The UNDP measures Human Development in countries of the world on
the basis of Life Expectancy, Literacy, Education and Standard of Living.
❖ In present times, Development primarily implies Sustainable Development, a
process of development that is sustainable, enduring, environment-friendly,
integrated & holistic. The objective of Sustainable development is to meet the needs
of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs.
Important Features of Sustainable Development:
❖ Sustainable development is a development that not only provides but, also, sustains.
It integrates ‘What is the case’ with ‘What ought to be the case’.
❖ It is essentially environmentalism, it prescribes development within the framework
of environment. It is not ‘above’ or ‘against’ or ‘at the cost of’ environment, it is in
sync with environment.
❖ It has both ‘Empirical content’ and ‘Prescriptive content’. The Empirical content
permits, within permissible limits, the existing practices that are ecologically just.
The Prescriptive content strives to attain certain goals.
❖ It has an ethical content. It strives to treat every component of the world as an end,
& never simply as a means.

Rawls’ Theory of Justice: Justice As Fairness

John Rawls attempts to accommodate social justice and procedural justice together in his
theory of justice. In his celebrated work A Theory of Justice, he points out that a good
society is characterized by a number of virtues and justice is the first virtue of a good
society. That is, justice is a necessary but not a sufficient condition of a good society.
According to Rawls, the problem of justice consists in ensuring a just distribution of
‘primary goods’, such as- rights and liberties, powers and opportunities, income and wealth,
self-respect and so on. Rawls’ theory of justice is a pure procedural theory. It means that
Page | 26
once certain principles of justice are unanimously accepted, the distribution resulting from
these will be necessarily just.
He attacks utilitarianism because in calculating the ‘greatest happiness of the greatest
number’ it may violate the rights of any particular individual. Rawls argues that the
sufferings of the distressed or minority cannot be compensated by enhancing the joys of the
prosperous or majority.
Rawls evolves a unique method to arrive at a unanimous procedure of justice. Following the
tradition of the ‘social contract’ Rawls has envisaged an ‘original position’ by abstracting
the individuals from their particular social and economic circumstances. These individuals
are placed behind a veil of ignorance, where they are supposed to be deliberating as rational
agents.
They are completely ignorant of their interests, skills and abilities as well as of the
conditions which lead to discrimination and conflict in society. But they have an elementary
knowledge of economics and psychology, and also have a ‘sense of justice’. They are self-
interested but not egoists.
According to Rawls, in such a state of uncertainty, each individual will hypothetically place
oneself in ‘the least advantaged position’ while recommending the criteria of allocation of
the primary goods and thereby, each of them will demand greatest benefit for the least
advantaged and thus,they would unanimously accept justice as fairness.
Criticisms:
❖ Communitarians object to the idea that individuals abstracted from their social,
economic and cultural contexts can make choices. Thus, justice can only be
understood within a communal framework and not on the basis of abstract, universal
principles.
❖ Feminist Susan Moller Okin in her book, Justice, Gender and the Family, argues
that any theory of justice which is silent about the inequalities within the family is
an incomplete one. Susan’s suggestion is to deny people in the original position any
knowledge of whether they are men or women and then undertake an evaluation of
the family, for it is part of the basic structure of the society. She argues, this will
result in an evaluation of the injustices within the family and thus, a truly humanist
notion of justice could be created.

Ethical/Moral Relativism
Ethical or Moral relativism is the view that there are no universally valid moral principles.
There are two forms of moral relativism: 1. Subjectivism and 2. Cultural relativism.
Opposed to moral relativism, we have moral objectivism, which affirms the universal
validity of moral principles.
Subjectivism:
According to subjectivism, moral statements are statements of personal opinion and there is
no objective way to determine which moral or ethical principle is the best.
“X is right” means “X is right for me”. Subjectivism is a form of relativism because it says
right and wrong are relative to subjective preferences. Thus, something can be right for one

Page | 27
person and wrong for another. It is like people have different ethical tastes.
Limitations:
1. Subjectivists would believe that there can be no ethical disagreement since ethics is about
personal opinion. However, we notice that there are genuine ethical disagreements. For
instance, people disagree about ethical issues, such as capital punishment, abortion,
euthanasia and so on.
2. Subjectivism suggests that one can never be wrong about ethics, since one is an authority
with regard to personal opinion. But this would imply that no one was ever wrong about
slavery, untouchability, sati and other heinous acts.
Cultural Relativism:
According to cultural relativism, right and wrong are relative to one’s culture. It is also
known as Conventionalism. Cultural relativism maintains that there is no universal ethical
principle that transcends culture, ethical beliefs differ from society to society. For example,
some societies accept monogamy, while others polygamy.
Unlike subjectivism, cultural relativism maintains that ethical standard transcends
individual opinion and that right and wrong are relative to one’s culture. Also, there is no
single, overriding standard for all cultures to follow. In other words, custom is the king.
Limitations:
1. It is not possible to draw cultural boundaries in contemporary times. Even if ethics is
relative to the culture, one needs to ascertain to what culture one belongs to.
2. Again, one may belong to several cultures and subcultures but then different cultures
would give different advice and one would always stand at the crossroad not knowing in
which direction shall one proceed.
3. Some critics argue that Cultural relativism is self-contradictory, since it maintains that
there are no universal standard that applies across the cultures. But if cultural relativism is
true, then it would be true for all the cultures. Thus, if cultural relativism is true then, at
once, it must also be false.
Emotivism
It is about the meaning of ethical words. It is the view that ethical statements are
expressions of emotions and not statements of facts. According to emotivists, when we say
‘X is right or good’, we express positive emotions about it. Similarly, when we say ‘Y is
wrong or bad’, we express negative emotions about it. For them, ethical statements are not
cognitive judgments about emotion but are expressions of emotion. They believe that
expressions of emotion are intended to alter the behaviour of others.
Problem:
Emotivism suggests that there can be no rational deliberations about ethics, since ethics
involves expressions of emotions. But we notice that people make rational ethical
arguments all the time.
Applied Ethics
Ethics is not just about speculation on general principles but it is meant to be applied to real
life issues and to give people specific advice.
Bio-medical ethics:
Page | 28
Bio-medical ethics is the application of ethical principles to medicine and biotechnology.
Two important Bio-medical ethical issues are abortion and euthanasia.
Abortion
The ethical discussion on Abortion (the termination of a pregnancy) may involve two
important questions: 1. Whether it is ethically permissible for a woman to terminate her
own pregnancy? 2. Whether it would be ethical for society to make laws about whether and
when a woman can terminate a pregnancy?
Much of the debate over abortion revolves around what ethicists call personhood. To be a
person is to possess a certain number of rights, in particular the right not to be killed. People
who think abortion is unethical characterise themselves as pro-life. The pro-life argument is
that an embryo or foetus is a person with a right to life. It implies that even if a woman has a
right over her own body, she still should not be allowed to terminate a pregnancy. Some
pro-lifers believe that abortion is never ethically permissible, while others think that
abortion is generally impermissible but may be permissible in cases of rape or a danger to
the life of the mother. Thus, pro-life argument claims that abortion is unjust killing, so, it is
unethical and society should pass laws prohibiting it.
People who believe that abortion in some cases can be ethically permissible are termed as
pro-choice. The Pro-choice argument is that a woman has a right over her body and even if
an embryo is a person, a woman still has the right to terminate a pregnancy in defence of
her rights. Some in this camp believe that abortion is always permissible; some believe that
it is rarely permissible and others believe that even if abortion is unethical society still
should not have laws against it.
Euthanasia:
Euthanasia is the practice of intentionally ending the life of someone who is suffering from
an incurable illness or is in irreversible coma. In the last stages of a terminal illness,
patients, who don’t want to live the rest of life in agonizing pain, may ask a doctor or family
member to help them end their lives.
Euthanasia may be active or passive: active euthanasia is one, where a person physically
helps a person end one’s life. For example, it may involve a doctor taking steps to end a
patient’s life, such as prescribing a lethal medicine. In passive euthanasia, on the other hand,
a person has no active role in ending life. In this case life sustaining treatment may be
withdrawn.
Euthanasia may be voluntary, non-voluntary and involuntary: Voluntary euthanasia denotes
that a patient has actively consented to end his or her life. Non-voluntary euthanasia means
that a person’s life is ended without knowledge of one’s wishes but according to the wishes
of a person’s family. Involuntary euthanasia happens when a terminally ill person’s life is
ended against that person’s wishes.
Some ethicists maintain that passive voluntary or non-voluntary euthanasia in general may
be ethically permissible, and that ethical problems with non-voluntary euthanasia can be
avoided to a great extent through an advanced directive.
According to others, life is too precious to be sacrificed under any circumstances, however,
in some cases life itself may become miserable with unbearable pain, in other words, life
may be become akin to ‘living hell’. In the final stages of a terminal illness, a patient can be
Page | 29
in so much pain that one may come to see ending the pain as preferable to living on for a
short period of time. To deprive some one of this wish seems unusually cruel to many
people. A person should be allowed to die with dignity rather than be forced to stay alive to
the bitter end.
Someone seeking to commit suicide would be seen as mentally ill and in need of help, such
a decision can be regarded as irrational. While contemplating suicide, a person may believe
that one will never be happy again, but in reality, pain often subsides. However, the
terminally ill patient often has the specific information that the future is indeed short and
that the pain won’t subside. Such a decision cannot be termed irrational and it may be in
sync with individual’s autonomy.
According to opponents of euthanasia, active euthanasia has another name- murder. They
argue that physicians who help patients commit suicide will tarnish the medical profession
and make people more afraid of doctors. However, they may not oppose passive euthanasia
by distinguishing between killing a patient and merely letting him or her die. They maintain
that it is ethically permissible to let a patient die but killing the patient is ethically
problematic, since another person brings about death.

Environmental Ethics:
Environmental ethics claims that ethical concerns should be expanded beyond direct
human-to-human interaction. Environmental ethics attributes moral value to non-human
things such as animals, plants and thereby whole ecosystems. There are three important
approaches- conservationism, deep ecology and social ecology- which recognize the value
of the non-human world, analyse the root causes of the numerous problems and challenges
that environment faces today and prescribe guidelines for interaction with the environment.
Conservationism:
Conservationism has an anthropocentric (human-centred) orientation towards environment.
It urges humans to be less short-sighted and to amend their treatment of the non-human
world if they don’t want to end up harming themselves in the long run. Conservationism
recognizes that protecting the non-human world is an important human interest and
prescribes forming of policies by taking into consideration cost-benefit analysis.
However, conservationism attributes instrumental value to the environment, it emphasises
that humanity needs to conserve and preserve nature, since humanity cannot do without it.
In other words, fulfilment of human interests depends on a well-maintained non-human
world.
Deep Ecology:
According to deep ecology, the root of environmental problems stems from the very deep
and basic misconception that humans have about their relation with nature. Humans tend to
think that they are fundamentally independent from nature. However, humans are actually
essentially interconnected components of larger ecosystems and the biotic world. According
to deep ecology, until humans recognize this very deep and fundamental interconnection,
they will continue to dominate and control the non-human world and strip its resources
unmindfully to satisfy human interests.
One of the central notions of deep ecology is that all members of the biotic community as
Page | 30
well as the ecosystem itself are valuable. Deep ecology has two main founders: Arne Naess
and Aldo Leopold, although they have some differences but they are united in maintaining
that a valid environmental strategy, firstly, must see the world and value in holistic terms
instead of in individualistic terms. That is, it is the whole environment which has inherent
value and humans should really think in terms of what benefit the whole when deciding
how to act. Secondly, it must be recognized that human beings are components of the
environment and are not separate from or outside of it.
Critics challenge the eco-centric approach of deep ecology arguing that it is fascist, since it
places too much power in the hands of the whole, it may end up oppressing the individuals
within it. As a response to the critics, some deep ecologists have argued for a weaker
version of deep ecology. They argue that humans can be given a primary place of value, but
not in a dictatorial sense. Instead, the interests of other members of the biotic community, as
well as the ecosystem as a whole, need to be taken into moral consideration while planning
actions or behaviours or setting social policy.
Social Ecology:
According to social ecology, humans have a habit of structuring their relationships in terms
of hierarchies, domination and control, and these factors degrade their environmental
behaviours as well. Humans organize societies, institutions and practices in ways that
benefit the powerful and exploit the weak, encouraging those on the top to see those at the
bottom as tools or resources. Eventually, this domination spills over into people’s
behaviours and policies toward the environment. Thus, the root cause or cancer is the logic
of domination.
To get rid of this way of thinking, social ecologists claim that we must take steps to
transform our personal relationships and work hard to transform the social and political
frameworks around us so that we spread and promote radically egalitarian approaches to
human social interaction. If collectively humans can commit to these goals, humanity’s
stance toward the environment will gradually change in a wholesale manner for the better.
Eco-feminism:
Eco-feminism agrees with social ecology that the cause of environmental problems lies in
an internalization of the logic of domination, but eco-feminists think that the main or
primary pattern of domination in society is by men over women, a system called patriarchy.
Thus, the eco-feminists believe that the primary focus should be on challenging and
eliminating patriarchal dimensions from social and personal interactions. If society can do
this, then eco-friendly behaviour will result.
The eco-feminists have an interesting argument relating patriarchy to the mistreatment of
the environment. Following through the logic of domination, starting with the domination of
women by men, ends with the domination of nature. According to eco-feminists, if society
can overcome the male domination of women, the chain of logic collapses and nature is
eventually freed from the bad effects of humanity’s own social cancer.

Professional Ethics:
Although different professions have different professional responsibilities, but all
professions share a commitment to some general points of ethics:
Page | 31
Conflicts of interest:
Professionals often find themselves in situations where they can enjoy benefits not available
to the regular public. When someone’s work stands to serve an interest in conflict with their
obligations as a professional, that person is experiencing a conflict of interest.
Conflicts of interest are problematic for professionals because they threaten to undermine
the impartial, trained judgments that make professions so beneficial to society. the most
common type of conflict of interest is when a professional is offered gifts or monetary
bribes to sway the expert judgment. Not all conflicts of interest are quite as evident as
accepting money or gifts as a bribe. Some conflicts are more subtle. Professionals are better
off by avoiding conflicts of interest because they must maintain the integrity of their
professional judgment.
Even when a conflict of interest won’t necessarily lead to compromised professional
judgment, professionals always should disclose the conflict to both interests. A conflict of
interest itself may not always be the death of professional judgment, but hiding conflicts
almost always signifies that something dubious is going on.
Whistle-blowing:
When the organization, a professional works for, does something unethical that needs to
come to light, plenty of people may feel an obligation to disclose the information to outside
sources. When people bring these bad practices to light without the company’s permission,
it’s called whistle-blowing.
Disclosing information about unethical activity may sound fairly easy, but in real life, the
decision to blow the whistle is anything but simple. Generally, a professional is obligated to
blow the whistle when:
1. The harm or ethical wrongdoing is serious in nature and will continue if not made public.
2. The professional has exhausted all reasonable procedures for solving the problem within
the organization.
3. The professional has enough evidence to make a plausible case to the public.
Professional ethics suggests that a duty to public safety comes first, but it can be difficult
for organizations to appreciate disloyalty, even when it happens for the public good.

Questions From Previous Mains:

2013: Q 2 (a): What do you understand by the following terms in the context of public
service (250 words)
1. Integrity
2. Perseverance
3. Spirit of Service
4. Commitment
5. Courage of Conviction.
(b) Indicate two more attributes which you consider important for public service. Justify
your answer. (100 words)
2013: Q8: It is often said that ‘politics’ and ‘ethics’ do not go together. What is your
opinion in this regard? Justify your answer with illustrations.
Page | 32
2013: Q 11: Sivakasi in Tamil Nadu is known for its manufacturing clusters on firecrackers
and matches. The local economy of the area is largely dependent on firecrackers industry. It
has led to tangible economic development and improved standard of living in the area.
So far as child labour norms for hazardous industries like firecrackers industry are
concerned, International Labour Organization (ILO) has set the minimum age as 18 years.
In India, however, this age is 14 years.
The units in industrial clusters of firecrackers can be classified into registered and non-
registered entities. One typical unit is household-based work. Though the law is clear on the
use of child labour employment norms in registered / non-registered units, it does not
include household-based works. Household-based work means children under the
supervision of their parents/relatives. To evade child labour norms, several units project
themselves as household-based works but employ children from outside. Needless to say
that employing children saves the costs for these units leading to higher profits to the
owners.
On your visit to one of the units at Sivakasi, the owner takes you around the unit which has
about 10-15 children below 14 years of age. The owner tells you that in his household-based
unit, the children are all his relatives. You notice that several children smirk, when the
owner tells you this. On deeper enquiry, you figure out that neither the owner nor the
children are able to satisfactorily establish their relationship with each other.
(a) Bring out and discuss the ethical issues involved in the above case.
(b) What would be your reaction after your above visit? (300 words).
2013: Q 12: Case Study: You are heading a leading technical institute of the country. The
institute is planning to convene an interview panel shortly under your chairmanship for
selection of the post of professors. A few days before the interview, you get a call from the
Personal secretary of a senior government functionary seeking your intervention in favour
of the selection of a close relative of the functionary for this post. The PS also informs you
that he is aware of the long pending and urgent proposals of your institute for grant of funds
for modernization, which are awaiting the functionary’s approval. He assures you that he
would get these proposals cleared.
(a) What are the options available to you?
(b) Evaluate each of these options and choose the option which you would adopt, giving
reasons. (250 words).
2013: Q 14: Case Study: You are the Executive Director of an upcoming Infotech
Company which is making a name for itself in the market.
Mr. A, who is a star performer, is heading the marketing team. In a short period of one year,
he has helped in doubling the revenues as well as creating a high brand equity for the
Company so much so that you are thinking of promoting him. However, you have been
receiving information from many corners about his attitude towards the female colleagues;
particularly his habit of making loose comments on women. In addition, he regularly sends
indecent SMS’s to all the team members including his female colleagues.
One day, late in the evening, Mrs. X, who is one of Mr. A’s team members, comes to you
visibly disturbed. She complains against the continued misconduct of Mr. A, who has been
making undesirable advances towards her and has even tried to touch her inappropriately in
Page | 33
his cabin.
She tenders her resignation and leaves your office.
(a) What are the options available to you?
(b) Evaluate each of these options and choose the option you would adopt, giving reasons.
(250 words).
2014: Q 2 (a): In the context of defence services, ‘Patriotism’ demands readiness to even
lay down one’s life in protecting the nation. According to you, what does patriotism imply
in everyday civil life? Explain with illustrations and justify your answer. (150 Words).
2014: Q 8: We are witnessing increasing instances of sexual violence against women in the
country. Despite existing legal provisions against it, the number of such incidences is on the
rise. Suggest some innovative measures to tackle this menace. (150 words)
2014 Q 9: Case Study: Now-a-days, there is an increasing thrust on economic development
all around the globe. At the same time, there is also an increasing concern about
environmental degradation caused by development. Many a time, we face a direct conflict
between developmental activity and environmental quality. It is neither feasible to stop or
curtail the developmental process, nor it is advisable to keep degrading the environment, as
it threatens our very survival.
Discuss some feasible strategies which could be adopted to eliminate this conflict and
which could lead to sustainable development. (250 words).
2015: Q 1 (a): What is meant by ‘environmental ethics’? Why is it important to study?
Discuss any one environmental issue from the viewpoint of environmental ethics. (150
words)
2015: Q 1 (b): Differentiate between
(iii) Discrimination and Preferential treatment. (50 Words).
2015: Q 4 (a): “Social values are more important than economic values”. Discuss the above
statement with examples in the context of inclusive growth of a nation (150 Words).
2015: Q 10: Case Study: You are the Sarpanch of a Panchayat. There is a primary school
run by the government in your area. Midday meals are provided to the children attending
the school. The Headmaster has now appointed a new cook in the school to prepare the
meals. However, when it is found that the cook is from Dalit community, almost half of the
children belonging to higher castes are not allowed to take meals by their parents.
Consequently, the attendance in the school falls sharply. This could result in the possibility
of discontinuation of midday meal scheme, thereafter of teaching staff and subsequent
closing down the school.
(a) Discuss some feasible strategies to overcome the conflict and to create right ambience.
(b) What should be the responsibilities of different social segments and agencies to create
positive social ambience for accepting such changes?
2015: Q 14: Case Study: You are recently posted as district development officer of a
district. Shortly thereafter you found that there is considerable tension in the rural areas of
your district on the issue of sending girls to schools.
The elders of the village feel that many problems have come up because girls are being
educated and they are stepping out of the safe environment of the household. They are of

Page | 34
the view that the girls should be quickly married off with minimum education. The girls are
also competing for jobs after education, which have traditionally remained in boys’
exclusive domain, adding to unemployment amongst male population.
The younger generation feels that in the present era, girls should have equal opportunities
for education and employment, and other means of livelihood. The entire locality is divided
between the elders and the younger lot and further sub-divided between sexes in both
generations. You come to know that in Panchayat or in other local bodies or even in busy
crossroads, the issue is being acrimoniously debated.
One day you are informed that an unpleasant incident has taken place. Some girls were
molested, when they were en route to schools. The incident led to clashes between several
groups and a law-and-order problem has arisen. The elders after heated discussion have
taken a joint decision not to allow girls to go to school and to socially boycott all such
families, which do not follow their dictate.
(a) What steps would you take to ensure girls’ safety without disrupting their education?
(b) How would you manage and mould patriarchic attitude of the village elders to ensure
harmony in the inter-generational relations?
2016: Q1 (a): Explain how ethics contributes to social and human well-being? (150
Words).
2016 Q 2 (a): What do you understand by the terms ‘governance’, ‘good governance’ and
‘ethical governance’. (150 words).
2016 Q 3 (a): Analyse John Rawls’ concept of social justice in the Indian context. (150
words).
2017: Q 2: Examine the relevance of the following in the context of civil service:
(c) Fairness and Justice
(d) Courage of conviction
(e) Spirit of service
2017 Q 3: Young people with ethical conduct are not willing to come forward to join active
politics. Suggest steps to motivate them to come forward. (150 words).
2017: Q 7 (b): Increased national wealth did not result in equitable distribution of its
benefits. It has created only some “enclaves of modernity and prosperity for a small
minority at the cost of the majority.” Justify. (150 words).
2018: Q 1 (a): State the three basic values, universal in nature, in the context of civil
services and bring out their importance. (150 words)
2018: Q 4 (a): “In doing a good thing, everything is permitted which is not prohibited
expressly or by clear implication.” Examine the statement with suitable examples in the
context of a public servant discharging his/her duties. (150 words).
2018 Q 6: Bring out what this quotation means to you in the present context:
(a) “The true rule, in determining to embrace, or reject any thing, is not whether it has any
evil in it, but whether it has more evil than good. There are few things wholly evil or wholly
good. Almost every thing, especially of governmental policy, is an inseparable compound
of the two; so that our best judgment of the preponderance between them is continually
demanded.” – Abraham Lincoln (150 words).
Page | 35
2018 Q 7: Case Study: Rakesh is a responsible district level officer, who enjoys the trust of
his higher officials. Knowing his honesty, the government entrusted him with the
responsibility of identifying the beneficiaries under a healthcare scheme meant for senior
citizens.
The criteria to be a beneficiary are the following:
(a) 60 years of age or above.
(b) Belonging to a reserved community.
(c) Family income of less than rupees 1 lakh per annum.
(d) Post-treatment prognosis is likely to be high to make a positive difference to the quality
of life of the beneficiary.
One day, an old couple visited Rakesh’s office with their application. They have been the
residents of a village in his district since birth. The old man is diagnosed with a rare
condition that causes obstruction in the large intestine. As a consequence, he has severe
abdominal pain frequently that prevents him from doing any physical labour. The couple
have no children to support them. The expert surgeon whom they contacted is willing to do
the surgery without charging any fee. However, the couples will have to bear the cost of
incidental charges, such as medicines, hospitalization, etc., to the tune of rupees 1 lakh. The
couple fulfills all the criteria except criterion ‘b’. However, any financial aid would
certainly make a significant difference in their quality of life.
How should Rakesh respond to the situation? (250 words).
2019: Q 1(a): What are the basic principles of public life? Illustrate any three of these with
suitable examples. (150 words)
2019: Q 1 (b): What do you understand by the term ‘Public Servant’? Reflect on the
expected role of public servant. (150 words).
2019: Q 3(a): What is meant by the term ‘Constitutional Morality’? How does one uphold
constitutional morality? (150 words)
2019: Q 9: Case Study: An apparel manufacturing company having large number of
women employees was losing sales due to various factors. The company hired a reputed
marketing executive, who increased the volume of sales within a short span of time.
However, some unconfirmed reports came up regarding his indulgence in sexual harassment
at the work place.
After sometime, a woman employee lodged a formal complaint to the management against
the marketing executive about sexually harassing her. Faced with the company’s
indifference in not taking cognizance of her grievance, she lodged an FIR with the Police.
Realizing the sensitivity and gravity of the situation, the company called the woman
employee to negotiate. In that she was offered a hefty sum of money to withdraw the
complaint and the FIR and also give in writing that the marketing executive is not involved
in the case.
Identify the ethical issues involved in this case. What options are available to the woman
employee? (250 words)
2020: Q 3(b): ‘The will to power exists, but it can be tamed and be guided by rationality
and principles of moral duty.’ Examine this statement in the context of international

Page | 36
relations. (150 words).
2020 Q 5 (a): What are the main factors responsible for gender inequality in India? Discuss
the contribution of Savitribai Phule in this regard. (150 words).
2020 Q 5 (b): ‘The current internet expansion has instilled a different set of cultural values
which are often in conflict with traditional values.’ Discuss. (150 words)
2020 Q 6: What this quotation means to you?
(a) “Condemn none: if you can stretch out a helping hand, do so. If not, fold your hands,
bless your brothers, and let them go their own way.”- Swami Vivekanand. (150 words)
2020: Case Studies: Ethical Issues involved.
Answers of Representative Questions (Lecture IV)
Q.1: Do you think a Good End can justify the Means? If the End justifies the Means,
what justifies the End? Explain your position with due justification.
Ans: I do not think that a good end can justify the means, since in that case we will have to
accept the end as absolute and then there will be no scope to review or amend the end any
further. Every value, whether seen as a means or as an end, shall be subjected to incessant
scrutiny, it is always in a state of becoming and it must evolve constantly. Hence, critical
tenability can be the only justification for a means as well as an end.
An ethical framework that emphasises on good end is characterized as teleological while the
one which emphasises on the rightness of the means or duty is characterized as
deontological. A blend of both can be the most tenable perspective. I believe means and end
shall have a reciprocal relation, they are mutually relative. Accordingly, in a relative sense a
good end can justify the means, but only right means and not any means. That is, a good
end cannot justify a wrong means. Means and end shall form a continuum, means and end
shall be inclusive of each other.
As Gandhi says ‘’Ahinsa is the means and Satya is the end’’, the means and end shall be
regarded as two aspects of the same coin and neither of the two shall be defined, absolutely
or independently, without reference to other. Thus, purity of means and purity of end are
inviolable prerequisites of moral evaluation. Justice shall be both the journey as well as the
destination.
Q.2: What, according to you, shall have moral precedence- Right or Duty? Explain
your position with reason and illustrations.
Ans: I believe the moral precedence of right or duty shall be determined in a context. Both
rights and duties are integral to the conceptions of a just State and a life of self-respect and
dignity. Generally, rights are conceptually contrasted with duties because rights are
advantages while duties are disadvantages. The important meanings of ‘rights’ are- claims,
liberties, powers and immunities. In popular sense, rights are justified claims. Some
important rights are natural rights or right to life, human rights and fundamental rights.
Moreover, there is a close relationship between the rights and duties. Rights and duties are
integral to individual’s good life and social welfare. Rights and duties are logical
correlatives, every right brings an obligation with it. They are meaningless apart from each
other. Duty is an inalienable part of right. If we all have a right to life then it is also our duty
to respect the ‘right to life’ of others. That is, the right of the one is the duty of the other
and vice-versa. If every individual pays sole attention to one’s rights alone and does not
Page | 37
perform one’s duties towards others and State, rights of every individual will cease to exist.
However, some primordial rights like ‘natural rights’ and ‘human rights’ can be given moral
precedence. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau maintain that human beings had natural rights
even before the origin of the state. Basic human rights are- ‘right to life’, ‘right to a fair
trial’ and ‘right not to be enslaved’. The International Bill of Rights states: ‘’All human
beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights’’. It is argued that human rights are
universal and inalienable, and they shall take precedence and shall never be ignored even in
those cases where society stands to benefit.
The Constitution of India confers Fundamental Rights. In the case of Fundamental Rights’
violations, Supreme court of india can be approached directly as per article 32, which is an
acknowledgment of the precedence of these rights. In a recent judgment Supreme Court has
pronounced right to privacy as a fundamental right intrinsic to the right to life and personal
liberty protected by Article 21. In the judgment while privacy has been described as the
‘’constitutional core of human dignity’’ protecting ‘’heterogeneity and recognises the
plurality and diversity of our culture’’. However, the judgment also reiterates that privacy is
not absolute and balance must be struck between individual interests and legitimate aims
like national security, criminal investigations, encouraging innovation and preventing
leakages.
I believe rather than putting one over other we should reconcile precedence of both rights
and duties on the lines of Kant, who has uniquely integrated both the dimensions in his
principle of universalizability by formulating, on the one hand, duty on the lines of natural
law and, on the other, upholding the moral right of treating humanity always as an end.
Q.3: Do you consider war moral or immoral? Explain your position with examples.
Ans: I believe war can be moral as well as immoral, the rightness or wrongness of a war,
shall be determined by its intent and the context. As an end, war can never be moral.
However, as a means it can have some instrumental value. In Bhagavadgeeta, Krishna
exhorts Arjun to wage war since as a warrior he is duty bound to fight against injustice.
Thus, metaphorically, as a Dharma-yuddha against adharma, it can be moral, that is, as a
crusade against vice, war can be just. So, war against terrorism, corruption, casteism,
poverty, malnutrition, female-foeticide, farmer’s suicide, inequality and injustice can be
just.
Further, one can wage a war against external forces or internal forces, Aristotle says, ‘’ I
count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies’’.
Similarly, Jaina talks about conquering anger, greed, arrogance and delusion. However, a
war that promotes violence, imperialism, militarization, genocide, depravity and hatred can
never be moral. Moreover, history has taught us that war can never resolve any problem, it
only aggravates the problem, it may temporarily culminate into a fragile peace but
eventually it annihilates the sanctity of human values and institutions. Thus, except
ahinsatamaka war with noble intent, every other form of war is immoral and reprehensible.
We need to create a congenial atmosphere to promote a culture of dialogue, with a sense of
love, respect and tolerance for all and sundry.
Q.4: Some people maintain that ‘good is prior to right’, while others hold that ‘right is
prior to good’. What is your position in this regard? Explain with due justification.

Page | 38
Ans: One who holds that ‘good is prior to right’ can be a teleologist or consequentialist,
where the value of an act is determined in accordance with the goodness of result or
consequence. Here duty can have instrumental value, it can be a means to good end. For
instance, Utilitarianism would attribute rightness to an act in proportion to ‘The Greatest
Happiness for the Greatest Number’.
On the other hand, the one who believes ‘right is prior to good’ can be a deontologist, like
Kant, where duty has intrinsic value. Duty is performed for the sake of duty, it is an end in
itself. That is, action is right in itself, its rightness is independent of the production or
absence of good end.
I believe an integration of both these perspectives can enable one to compose a more
progressive world-view, somewhat on the lines of Bhagavad-Gita. We must strive to
envisage the most profound ideals and, at the same time, the most efficient principles of
conduct to realise them. However, once we formulate the duty, we must perform the duty
for the sake of it, with a sense of absolute commitment, in a detached manner, without
speculating about the result. Since action alone is in our purview not its result. One shall
neither be elated nor depressed by the outcome. Thus, success or failures shall not affect us,
we must learn to take them in our stride.
Q.5: Bring out what this quotation means to you in the present context:
“Dream not that men will move their little finger to serve you, unless their own
advantage in so doing be obvious to them”. – Jeremy Bentham.
Ans: Bentham has argued that every action of human being is motivated by self-interest.
However, despite being selfish, according to him, we are motivated to work for ‘the greatest
happiness of the greatest number’ since we are governed by two sovereign masters-
pleasure and pain. His democratic principle of justice- “each is to count for one and no one
for more than one” and utility principle has introduced many reforms in social and legal
spheres of human life. Moreover, his own student J.S. Mill has countered his view by
emphasizing on the progressive outlook of human being. Mill has acknowledged intrinsic
nobility of human being whereby they are motivated from within to serve the interests of
others.
In present times, I believe utilitarianism is not a very tenable idea for us to refer to. As
Rawls has argued, such a theory may result into violating the rights of minorities for the
sake of greatest number. We must recognize that basic human rights are inviolable.
Similarly, Gandhi, in his conception of sarvodaya samaj, has emphasized that we should
strive to empower and uplift each and every member of society rather than the greatest
number, since that is the only way to attain happiness in true sense of the term. Thus, we
need to understand that even if we are selfish we need to contemplate to ascertain what
constitute our self interest. And it is a tenable idea to maintain that selfishness, self-
interestedness and selflessness can supplement and complement each other.
Q.6: Analyse the moral and political significance of Rousseau’s conception of General
Will in the Indian context.
Ans: Rousseau, through the concept of the general will, attempts to provide a foundation for
good government, where policies as well social and political ideals are to be formulated
through collective deliberations. General will is an expression of common good

Page | 39
transcending particular interests and vested interests. He regards society as ‘social
organism’. The general will is the will of this organism. It is different from the will of any
particular individual or group, and even free from ‘the will of all’. He believes General will
cannot err, it is infallible. He says, ‘’Man is born free but everywhere he is in chains’’. He
believes human beings are naturally good but become corrupted by society and institutions.
He advocates egalitarianism.
I believe his general will can have immense moral and political significance in the Indian
context. General will promotes collective deliberations, thus, a country like India with a
composite fabric characterised by multiplicity, disparity and diversity, will be able to
integrate and synthesise the aspirations of all and sundry organically through collective
deliberations and will uphold the spirit of secularism and fraternity in true sense. It can pave
the path towards a participative form of government where the voice of we the people will
determine the path of development in a decentralised manner. Impartiality, disinterestedness
and non-partisanship will characterise the administration and governance culminating into
good governance.
John Rawls’ conception of ‘Justice as fairness’ is similar to Rousseau’s general will.
Rousseau has influenced Kant’s principle of universalizability as well. In fact, ethics of
Bhagavadgeeta suggests a similar perspective; Bhagavadgeeta prescribes disinterested
performance of action for the attainment of Lokasangraha or the welfare of the people. An
agent is asked to perform one’s own duty sincerely to the best of one’s ability in a
disinterested and impartial manner without speculating about the result, with the promise
that such a committed way of life is bound to culminate into the welfare of all.
Thus, taking cue from Rousseau’s general will, we, as an individual or as an institution,
shall strive to think like an impersonal agent of change, bereft of social, cultural, religious
and sexual identities, in order to have progressive deliberation to script a New India.
Q.7: Discuss Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay’s concept of ‘Integral Humanism’.
Ans: Pandit Upadhyay has envisioned ‘Integral Humanism’ as the essence of India. Integral
humanism advocates an integrated perspective towards life and politics, which endeavours
to synthesise organically, the material and the spiritual, the individual and the collective,
and thereby aspires to introduce a decentralized system of governance with partnership
between the citizen and government. It aspires to make economy self-reliant through
indigenous model, in order to create a compassionate and egalitarian society. He believes
western concepts over emphasise on individualism, consumerism, materialism or capitalism
and such a world-view will not do justice to the basic character of India. He believes
Integral Humanism can propagate and realize the true essence of Bharatiya culture.
He maintains that true swaraj can be attained only through the framework of Integral
Humanism, where human being is primarily regarded as a spiritual being. His perspective
can be understood as a middle path between capitalism and socialism, where science can be
given its due but there shall be a synthesis of heritage and science. Integral Humanism puts
spiritual well-being as more profound than material well-being, we are not merely a
material body, but primarily we are soul. Similarly, we have to awaken our ‘national soul’
and ‘ethos’ to create a New India. Upadhayay maintains that Integral Humanism is inspired
by Advaita Vedanta of Adi Shankar, and accordingly it focuses on the underlying principle
of unity than the apparent differences. He believes that political life shall be in sync with
Page | 40
religious and moral values, and through political restructuring the values of Hindu way of
life and the cultural ethos of India shall be promoted.
His insistence on swadeshi and small-scale industrialization can be the reference point for
‘Make in India’ and ‘Skill India’. Again, partnership between citizen and government can
be illustrated through the overwhelming support of people by giving up LPG subsidy
voluntarily.
Q.8: Bring out what this quotation means to you in the present context:
“The only stable state is the one in which all humans are equal before the law”
Ans: I am of the firm view that in order to be just and stable, a State must ensure equality
before law, equal protection of law and equality of rights and duties. Absence of
exploitation and absence of social, economic, political and legal inequalities are
preconditions for any State to become a welfare State.
Equality before law and equal protection of law imply that in the eyes of law all are equal.
Equality before law does not mean equal laws for each and everyone. Taking cue from
Aristotelian dictum, ‘equality among equals and inequality among unequals’, it implies,
equal laws for equals and unequal laws for unequals. The basis of such discrimination can
be sex, caste or economic condition.
Moreover, legal equality must be supplemented with social, political and economic
equalities. Social equality implies equality of opportunity for the development of one’s
personality, irrespective of one’s social status. Political equality implies that each one
should have the right to vote- ‘one man one vote’ and right to contest elections. Economic
equality must ensure that fetters of economic deprivation do not restrict individual’s social,
moral, mental and physical development.
The Indian Constitution is the best example of the modern concept of equality, since it treats
all its citizen alike. However, reasonable restrictions have been placed, which provide for
special provisions for women, children, backward classes, scheduled castes and tribes. The
Constitution also provides directive principles of state policy in which State has been
directed to work in such a way so as the citizens of India really become equal and the
objective of socio-economic justice is attained.
Q.9: Bring out what this quotation means to you in the present context:
“The root cause of our social and national degradation is our treatment of women”.
Ans: Unfortunately, women have been subjugated in every possible form in every sphere of
human life. The structure of the human society has remained androcentric, men have been
given the central position while women have been relegated to the periphery. Men have
been considered as ends, intrinsically valuable, while women have been treated as means to
their ends. The discrimination and subordination of women have been justified, primarily,
on the grounds of biological differences.
Feminists distinguish between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’, ‘sex’ refers to biological differences
whereas ‘gender’ refers to differences that are imposed by social norms, it is a socio-
cultural construct. As Simone de Beauvoir writes, “One is not born, but is made a woman”.
Such a male chauvinistic world-view has not only resulted in the oppression and
subordination of women folk but have not allowed us to develop optimally and holistically
as nation. This world-view has defined and structured every spheres of life and their
Page | 41
institutions - social, economic, political, religious as well as legal. As long as men would
continue to treat women and natural resources simply as means, we will never be able to
realise their respective potentialities to the maximum. As Vivekananda says, there can be no
welfare of the world unless the condition of woman is improved, it is not possible for a bird
to fly on only one wing.
Q.10: What is meant by ‘deep ecology’ and ‘eco-feminism’? Why is it important to
study these viewpoints? Explain with due justifications.
Ans: ‘Deep ecology’ and ‘eco-feminism’ are two principal approaches of environmental
ethics. These viewpoints are very significant to study, since they can impart us the insights
to understand the intrinsic value of the non-human world, analyse the root causes of the
numerous problems and challenges that environment faces today and prescribe guidelines
for interaction with the environment.
Deep ecology emphasises that humans tend to think that they are fundamentally
independent from nature, but humans are essentially interconnected components of larger
ecosystems and the biotic world. According to deep ecology, until we recognise this very
deep and fundamental interconnection, they will continue to dominate and control the non-
human world and strip its resources unmindfully to satisfy aspirations in an unjust manner.
It is maintained that all members of the biotic community as well as the ecosystem itself are
inherently valuable and human beings are components of the environment, they are not
separate from or outside of it.
Eco feminists maintain that the root cause of environmental degradation is patriarchy, the
domination of men over women culminates into domination over nature. If society can
overcome the male domination of women, the chain of logic would collapse and nature
would be eventually free from the ill- effects of patriarchy.
Q.11: Practices like ‘Polygamy’ and ‘Triple Talaq’ are acknowledged by some
Religious and Cultural Institutions. Do you think Secularism and tolerance require us
to condone such practices? Explain your position with due justifications.
Ans: I believe any practice that demeans and undermines the autonomy and self-respect of
women can never be condoned, whether in the name of secularism and tolerance or religion
and culture. Unfortunately, women have been subjugated in every social, cultural and
religious community in every sphere of human existence. The structure of human life has
remained androcentric, where men have occupied the central position while women have
been at the periphery. Men have been regarded as ends and women have been treated as
means. The discrimination and subordination of women have been justified on the grounds
of religion, culture and biological differences.
Taking inspiration from the dictum of Swami Dayananda Saraswati, “Go back to Vedas”, I
am of the view that religious and cultural texts are such classical magnum opus that no
finite readings could ever delineate the final and complete teachings, thus, humanity must
study them earnestly and constantly. Such a deliberative and critical orientation is not akin
to expressing disrespect or want of faith towards reverential texts, it shall not be seen as an
act of sacrilege or blasphemy. In fact, such an outlook would enable one to comprehend the
tenets of religion and culture in true sense of the term and thereby one could repose the trust
and faith in the religion and culture more profoundly. This will be a state of ‘knowledge

Page | 42
with integrity’ and it will empower one to discern just and progressive interpretations from
unjust and regressive interpretations and thereby introduce reforms autonomously, from
within and not without.
The spirit of Secularism and Tolerance shall guide us to create a cohesive society where
people of diverse religions and cultures could engage in a dialogue with mutual love and
respect and strive to live harmoniously with a sense of self-respect and dignity. It is argued
that any practice that leaves women socially, financially or emotionally vulnerable or
subject to the whims and fancy of men folk is incompatible with the letter and spirit of
Artticles 14 and 15 of the Constitution. The provision for religious freedom under Article
25 closes with a final clarification that “nothing in this article” shall prevent the state from
making laws providing for social welfare and reform.
However, reforms cannot be merely enforced through legal institutions, customs and
conventions can be so deeply entrenched that mechanical measures may not yield
significant results. The onus is on community to evolve conducive ambience of receptivity,
to take a resolve to replace androcentric, patriarchal structure, with androgynous, an equal
opportunity, society. Where we strive to empower women folk through education.
Empowerment shall be understood as a state of autonomy, sovereignty, where one can have
right to self-determination and shall be treated as an end rather than means.
Q.12: Do you believe that a moral system can be established without any reference to
religion? If not, then why not? If yes, then what could be the basis of such a system if
not religion? Explain your position with due justification.
Ans: I do believe that an autonomous and secular moral system can be established without
any reference to religion. Kant’s deontological ethics is the best example, where human
reason is the sole determinant of moral principles and duty is performed, not for the sake of
heaven or to avoid hell, but for the sake of duty alone. Moreover, religion can either be
theistic or atheistic. Religions like Buddhism, Jainism, Confucianism, Taoism and some
Hindu traditions like Samkhya are atheistic, they propound a way of life which is essentially
moral. Their tenets are embedded in human reason and positive human emotions like love,
compassion and forgiveness. By proclaiming ‘truth is God’, Gandhi suggests that ‘truth’ is
the most cardinal value of life and prescribes satyagrah as a secular way of life. Hence, a
life of earnestness, commitment and resolve can be characterized as moral as well as
religious.
Again, since ancient times, God has been regarded as the fountainhead of all human values-
moral, social and political. However, with persistent deliberations and scientific temper,
humanity has come a long way, we have transcended the era of blind adherence to religious
tenets. Now, we have evolved as a self-reliant and autonomous being, who can ‘Go back to
Vedas and Religious Texts’ and subject dogmatic and regressive interpretations to constant
scrutiny, and present a progressive interpretation of the texts. Thus, as a critical moral
aspirant, one shall seek justification and shall consider human reason and profound
emotions- love, compassion and forgiveness, as the fountainhead of all human values. Our
Constitutional ideals are the embodiments of such a progressive world-view, whether one is
a theist or an atheist, justice, equality and liberty can be equally and intrinsically sacrosanct
for each one of us.
Q.13: Case Study: Ayesha is a Medical student, one morning she hires a cab for the
Page | 43
College. En route, the cab-driver, Joginder, initiates a conversation with her. He says ‘’
Madam jee, you must be very intelligent since you study in one of the most prestigious
Medical Colleges of the Country. Can I seek your advice with regard to a personal
matter?’’. Ayesha nods her head in affirmation. Joginder tells her that an Uncle of his, who
is a farmer, has come to the city from his native village to donate his kidney to a patient.
The uncle says that Doctor has assured him that his health would not be affected at all after
the removal of one kidney and that he can lead a normal healthy life and, most importantly,
the family of the patient has offered him 10 lakhs rupees for this noble act. The Uncle says
that he is completely debt-ridden, he has no money left in the wake of the successive crop
failures. Moreover, he has a daughter to marry and for that he has to arrange huge sum of
money to pay as dowry. His Uncle has confessed that, in fact, he was so distressed that, at
one point, he was even thinking of committing suicide. But now all his problems would be
solved, the amount is so big that post operation not only he would be able to pay back all his
debts, but he would be able to marry her daughter and, at the same time, could feel
contented for saving a life as well. Thus, the Uncle is convinced that it is a win-win
situation for both the parties. However, Joginder states that somehow he is not comfortable
with the idea, firstly, because he feels it will have negative impact on the health of his Uncle
and, secondly, he thinks there is something intrinsically wrong because such an act is not
going to be an act of donation but it is more like a distress selling of body organ.
(a) Bring out and discuss the ethical issues involved in the above case.
(b) Write a moral critique of the above case.
(C) Do you think Organ donation can be moral? Discuss.
Ans: (a): The principal ethical issues involved are: dehumanization, subversion of rights,
social, economic and political injustices, social-malaise and poverty.
The given case completely subverts the principle of Kant, to treat humanity, whether in the
person of one’s own or in the person of every other, never simply as means but always as an
end. It reminds us that basic social and economic goods have been denied to a large section
of the people. Dowry is still a reality in society despite making laws against it.
(b) In the given case, the farmer is a victim of his situation and thus, he is unable to
differentiate between selling an organ and donating it. Medically, he may remain fit but
such an act can never be moral and legal, since he is not here to donate on his own accord
but his economic conditions have coerced him to take this extreme step. It is unfortunately
an act of distress selling, what can be more pathetic than this that one is selling one’s organ
to make one’s end meet! Again, patriarchal mind-set is so deeply entrenched in our society
that we are unable to acknowledge the self-worth of a woman. She is valued in terms of
dowry rather than her inherent qualities. That is, a woman is not treated as an end but as a
means.
It is quite ironical that despite taking a resolve to create a sovereign republic, we have not
been able to ensure sovereignty and autonomy of we the people across the sections of
society. We have not been able to create a welfare state, the hands that feed us are unable to
lead a respectable life. In spite of several welfare schemes, we have not been able to change
the plight of the farmers and they have been pushed to the margins. Owing to extreme
poverty farmers have been committing suicide and in the given case the farmer is coerced to

Page | 44
sell his organ. India is primarily an agrarian country where around 70% of the total
population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture. The government has been
taking initiatives to support the farmers by reducing the interest rates on loans and even
waving off agricultural loans. However, these have not helped much, we need to adopt more
comprehensive approach to deal with the situation without any further delay. As Gandhi
suggests in his Talisman that before performing an action we must ponder whether it is
going to make a difference to the lives of most marginalised and poorest of the poor, I
believe on similar lines we should formulate our policies to alleviate the social and
economic conditions of our farmers, ‘Sarvodaya through Antyodaya’.
(c) Yes, I do believe that organ donation can be moral. Classical Indian traditions teach us
non-possession, that is, one should not cling to bodily pleasures because one is not the body
but the soul. While body is mortal, the soul is immortal. Accordingly, as a moral aspirant, I
believe one should identify soul with one’s character and if one is able to uphold highest
ideals of life, one becomes immortal. The way Gandhi, Ambedkar, Bhagat Singh, Mother
Teresa or Kalam Sahab have become immortal. Similarly, one can become immortal post-
death by donating organs by practicing non-possession over body. However, donation in
true sense is a selfless act, donation with any other motive can never be regarded as moral.
Legal guidelines have also been framed in this regard to ward off misuse of the provisions.
Q.14 Case Study: Saraswati has a domestic maid, Janaki. Saraswati has been very happy
with the sincerity and punctuality of Janaki; she has been working at Saraswati’s house for
more than two years and she has always reported for the work at the scheduled time and has
never taken an off without prior intimation. But for the past 3 days Shanti has not reported
for the work and her mobile has also been switched-off. When Janaki does not report for the
work even on the fourth day and Saraswati does not get any information regarding her
whereabouts then she feels concerned and decides to visit the house of Janaki. Reaching
there Saraswati starts to admonish janaki for her sudden disappearance. Janaki pleads for
forgiveness and tears well up in her eyes. In an attempt to regain her composure Janaki
offers a chair to Saraswati and sits on the floor in front of her. Janaki points out that recently
she had also started to work at Flat No. 103, where, the house lady, while appointing her
had asked categorically whether she belonged to any lower caste to which she, despite being
a dalit, replied in negative, since she was in need and was unable to make her ends meet
with the existing income. After few days the house lady asked her to bring ID-proof for
verification, though initially she dilly-dallied. But after her insistence, she brought her
papers to her. The moment the lady read the surname of janaki’s husband, she became too
angry and started to yell at her hysterically. Furiously she accused her of desecrating the
sanctity of her kitchen and of profanizing the purity of her dharma by lying about her caste.
The lady has threatened Janaki that she would register an FIR implicating her of stealing
valuables from the house in case she is ever seen around her flat. Moreover, once an FIR is
lodged she would never be able to work anywhere in any capacity. The lady stated that
while she would be able to deprofanize her kitchen and house through havan, Janaki would
be cursed by God, she would have to pay for her unholy act.
(a) Bring out and discuss the ethical issues involved in the above case.
(b) Write a moral critique of the above case.
(c) What measures can you suggest for the eradication of caste-based discrimination?
Page | 45
Discuss.
Ans: (a): The principal ethical issues are: subversion of right to life, caste-based
discrimination, social ostracisation, religious superstitions and fanaticism and violation of
ethical law of karma.
The right to life and the Constitutional Fundamental Right of Janaki has been dishonoured
since she has been regarded as a lesser mortal and as an untouchable. She has been given a
caste-based identity and thereby she has been given a lower status. She has been treated as
an impure person because of her surname. Blind adherence to dogmatic interpretations of
religious teachings have not allowed us to be scientific in religious and social spheres, and
people are still perpetuating uncritical and inhuman practices. Moreover, Janaki has been
punished for an act that she has not committed or even intended. This is a violation of the
law: ‘as you sow so shall you reap’.
(b) As humans we all are intrinsically valuable. However, we have been attributing values
on each other on the basis of caste, race, sex, colour, religion, language or ethnicity since
time immemorial. We have subverted humanity through untouchability, slavery, genocide,
sati and female infanticide. But, unfortunately, even after reclaiming scientific temper we
have not been able to transcend social, cultural and linguistic identities and we continue to
assess an individual’s worth or lack of it in terms of one’s birth.
Ambedkar experienced caste discrimination right from the childhood, in school he had to sit
separately in a corner, teacher would not touch his notebooks and he was not allowed to
touch water pot. Ironically, this case study reiterates that we have not come a long way as
far as our social progression is concerned. Even today every sphere of life- social, political,
religious and economic – have imprints of caste identities.
(c) Caste-chauvinism is so deeply entrenched in the Indian society that it cannot be uprooted
through superfluous measures, we will have to adopt a set of integrated measures. We need
to introduce interventions in all the spheres of life- social, educational, professional,
political and religious.
Crusaders like Jotiba Phule, Ambedkar and Gandhi have questioned untouchability and
caste based discriminations. Ambedkar said ‘’Ours is a battle, not for wealth, nor for power.
Ours is a battle for freedom, for reclamation of human personality’’. Ambedkar coined the
term ‘Dalit’ to emphasise on their oppression and subjugation. Gandhi said ‘’Untouchability
is a sin against God and humanity’’.
Abolition of untouchability is a part of Fundamental Rights under article 17. Parliament has
passed Untouchability (offences) Act in 1955, this act was further amended and renamed as
Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. We have enacted Prevention of Atrocities Act as well
to prevent the oppression of Dalits.
However, manual-scavenging is still a reality in our society, people are dying while doing
these menial works and yet we are not doing enough to deal with the situation. The need of
the hour is to understand the true implications of ‘Swachta-Abhiyan’, not only we ought to
clean our external surroundings clean but we need to cleanse our inner-soul of all dogmas,
bigotry, prejudices and misconceptions. We need to embrace humanity with open arms
without any inhibitions of social, cultural, religious and linguistic identities.

Page | 46
Q.15: Case Study: Narayan is a young man, who is unemployed and resides in a small
village. One morning, he is informed by the Village-Pramukh that a dam is proposed to be
built on a nearby river. Narayan is told that the construction of the dam would result into the
employment of many young men like him and after its completion, the dam would produce
hydroelectric power which will further augment the economic development of the region.
However, the very next day a village elder, who is a credential environmentalist, convenes a
sabha (meeting) of all the villagers and appeals to them to protest against the planned dam.
He states that the dam would cause ecological imbalance in the region with repercussions
beyond anticipation. To begin with, many species inhabiting the river would become extinct
and eventually this entire region would become vulnerable to natural disasters. Thus, he is
of the view that dam is not going to bring any economic boon rather it is going to be like a
bane. Listening to all this, Narayan is completely disillusioned and does not know who to
go for the right advice.
(a) Consider that Narayan comes to you for the advice, what advice will you offer to
him?
Ans: My advice to Narayan would be to adopt an impartial approach towards the issue and
to take all aspects of the matter into consideration before adopting a standpoint. I will
suggest to him that an employment opportunity at the cost of environment is going to prove
fatal not only for him but for the entire human kind. Employment is every individual’s basic
right, but, as Buddha says, ‘Right-Livelihood’ is an important virtue, one should earn living
without causing harm or hurt to others. Moreover, I believe ethical values are to be regarded
as the most fundamental and cardinal values of life, and professional values shall be
understood as derivatives of ethical values.
I would apprise him of chipko andolan, a movement that spread environmental awareness
through Gandhian method of Satyagrah, where ordinary villagers actively participated and
helped us understand the importance of ecological balance and the significance of
conserving trees and other natural resources.
Thus, environmental concerns are paramount, they ought not to be neglected or overlooked.
Our economic planning and developmental model shall be in complete alignment with the
ecological balance.
(b) Do you think the only and major reason for preserving and protecting nature is to
protect our own good, or do you feel that we have a moral obligation towards nature
because it is intrinsically valuable? Explain your position with due justification.
Ans: The relation between Nature and Human has remained anthropocentric, and
accordingly, the conventional reason for preserving and protecting nature has been to
protect our own good. However, it is high time that we replace anthropocentric perspective
with ecological perspective, and realise that we have a moral obligation towards nature
because it is intrinsically valuable, and as humans we are organically related with the
nature. Taking cue from Kant, I believe, we should treat nature never simply as means but
always as an end. Human beings shall not consider themselves as dominant and separate
from nature, nor treat nature as subordinate. Thus, rather than attributing instrumental value
to nature we must attribute intrinsic value to nature.
Conventional developmental model shall be replaced with the model of Sustainable

Page | 47
Development. We shall adopt a holistic perspective and must understand that the nature as
whole has inherent value. We should script developmental model from the vantage point of
whole nature and not as an isolated and disconnected dominant group. Our happiness and
aspirations can never be realized in isolation or at the cost of nature. The good of one is
contained in the good of all.
(c) Do you think animals have rights? Why or why not? If you believe that they do
have rights, what are they? Discuss.
Ans: Yes, I do believe that animals have rights. I have learnt that as humans we are integral
components of the nature and we are the parts of a whole. Similarly, animals are also
integral parts of the same whole and thus, they cannot be regarded as our subordinates. If by
virtue of being a part of this nature we have ‘Right to Life’ then going by the same logic
animals too can be given the ‘Right to Life’. It can be argued that irreverence for even a
small form of life affects one’s reverence for all life. However, the implications of ‘Right to
Life’ in both the cases can be slightly different keeping in mind our respective differences.
Moreover, just as taking of human life can be argued to be moral in certain circumstances,
like euthanasia, similarly it can be justified in the case of animals as well under certain
circumstances. For instance, it can be argued that humans have a right to use animals for
food, just as animals use other animals, that is, it is in accordance with natural law to use
each other for food. But, of course, animals can also have right against cruelty, and
accordingly we can argue against experimentation on animals or killing animals for
consumer products, sports etc. Again, onus is on human beings to give rights to animals and
to protect their rights.
Q.16: Case Study: One morning Saraswati receives a phone call from her younger sister,
Mehak, who is studying in a premier University of our Country. Mehak is crying
inconsolably over the phone and she is not able to speak coherently, eventually she manages
to communicate. She mentions that she had put up a post on her social networking site few
days ago, wherein she questioned the patriarchal and the chauvinistic social structure. And
since then, there has been a deluge of responses from all and sundry. Except for few, all
posts are sexist and hostile in nature. People have been using abusive and offensive
language against her, she has been termed as an unscrupulous and shameless woman, who is
a blot on the women folk. Some people have threatened her with rape, while others have
acrimoniously termed her as an anti-national. Ironically, some eminent people have also
reacted to her in a satirical way and tried to have some laugh at her expense. Mehak says,
she is being stalked and trolled, she has also received phone calls from unidentified and
anonymous numbers. Listening to her ordeal, Saraswati is horrified to her wits’ end, she is
perplexed with disgust and unable to comprehend such an intolerant and cruel reactions to
an innocuous post of her sister.
(i) We are witnessing an increase in the instances of brutality against women from real to
virtual worlds, while incidents of rape, female foeticide, acid attack and sexual violence are
going on unabated, now women are not spared even in the virtual world. What according to
you is the root cause of this barbarism? What measures can you suggest to heal the
situation? Discuss.
(ii) Do you perceive it as a legal or moral offence? Explain your position with due
justification.
Page | 48
(iii) Do you think ‘freedom of expression’ implies ‘freedom to offend’? Discuss.
Ans: (i) It is quite unfortunate and deplorable that women have been brutalized and
subjugated in every possible form in every sphere of life- real to virtual. The structure of
human society has remained androcentric, men have occupied the central position while
women have been pushed to the periphery. Men have considered themselves as the masters
of women. They regard themselves as ends while treat women as means to their ends. The
discrimination and subordination of women have often been justified on the grounds of
biological differences. However, feminists distinguish between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’, while
‘sex’ refers to biological differences, ‘gender’ refers to differences that are imposed by
social norms. As Simone de Beauvoir says, ‘’one is not born, but is made a woman’’. The
responses of people are an expression of such a mindset, that smacks of patriarchy and
chauvinism.
Chauvinism is so deeply entrenched that it cannot be uprooted through some superfluous
measure, we will have to adopt a set of integrated measures to heal the situation. We need
potent interventions in all the spheres of life, namely, personal, professional, social,
economic, political and religious, thereby eventually we will be able to curb brutality in the
virtual world as well. It is argued that equality within home would ensure gender equality in
all other spheres of life. Political equality through reservation of seats in the parliament and
legislative assemblies can be a major step. Legal measures can be very effective but, I
believe, while such measures can check the incidents, they cannot radically transform the
society. Value based education can be the only way forward, an educational curriculum
which may go beyond the confines of class room, which may go beyond the realm of books,
and that can impart a holistic perspective towards life, which can enable us to deconstruct
and critically analyse prevailing stereotypes, customs, conventions and norms. Such an
orientation shall be inculcated from the day one of our lives, onus shall be on each one of us
to foster a culture of interpersonal dialogue and to treat humanity never simply as means but
always as an end.
Positive and negative incentives can be put in place to further improve the situation. We
need to ensure that women are given social, economic and political independence, in this
regard affirmative actions can go a long way. We need to empower women to enable them
to have complete control over their lives and to fight against bigotry.
(ii) I perceive it, primarily, as a moral offence, although it is indeed a legal offence as well.
An act can be immoral in itself, however, an act can be illegal only when an existing law
has been violated. For instance, I believe, sati is immoral intrinsically but it became illegal
only after we enacted a law against it. Similarly, slavery and untouchability have remained
immoral from the very beginning but they have become illegal posterior to the enactment of
laws. Moral deliberations can be regarded as the foundational discourse that eventually
embody themselves into the form of concrete laws.
(iii). I don’t think ‘freedom of expression’ implies ‘freedom to offend’, although in order to
uphold freedom of expression one may, unwittingly, end up offending others. The essence
of freedom of expression can be ‘earnestness’ and ‘curiosity’. As long as, one is critical
towards life and earnestly examines prevailing dogmas and prejudices of life, one’s act can
be moral and it can be regarded as freedom of expression. I am sure the act of Raja Ram
Mohan Roy would have offended many people when he questioned the practice of sati.
Page | 49
Similarly, Ambedkar’s action would have offended a vast number of people, when he
questioned untouchability. However, under the garb of examination, with ignoble intent, if
one is reinforcing a dogma or prejudice then such an act can be immoral and it can be
anything but an act of freedom of expression.
It is important for every individual to respect the sentiments of fellow human beings at the
level of thought, word and deed. However, it shall not restrain an individual from
undertaking an enquiry to examine the ethical tenability of a socio-cultural norm. One’s
autonomy must be honoured and no one shall be allowed to infringe upon one’s
fundamental right.
I believe freedom of expression is one of the most cardinal right. Rabindranath Tagore
seems to assert freedom of expression through his verse in Geetanjali, ‘’Where the mind is
without fear and the head is held high, where knowledge is free’. Thus, freedom of
expression shall be regarded as an inviolable right, it can be the panacea for every ill that is
ailing human life at the level of individual, family, state and Globe.
Q.17: Case Study: Consider that a friend of yours appears appalled and perplexed, after
your persistent cajoling the friend confides in you. The friend tells you that there are some
people who are trying to convince him that people of their community are lesser in number
in the village and are thus very vulnerable. Your friend points out that they are of the view
that there is a widespread movement and conspiracy to harm people of their community, to
vitiate and alter community-laws pertaining to social-life involuntary, people are being
coerced to change community, they are being attacked and killed because of their distinct
food habits, they are being stereotyped and alleged to be a threat to womenfolk. Your friend
submits that he is being persuaded by them to be a crusader and to wage a war against
injustice. He says he is being offered hefty sum of money and a life of luxury in return for
such a missionary work.
(a) Bring out and discuss the ethical issues involved in the above case.
(b) How would you respond to your friend? Explain your position with due justification.
(c) What, according to you, is ‘radicalisation’?
Ans: (a) The principal ethical issues are as follows:
1. Religious pluralism and tolerance
2. Truth and Propaganda
3. Transvaluation of values.
4. Right to food of one’s own choice.
5. Autonomy of individual.
6. Religious conversion.
Since ancient times religions have been regarded as the fountainhead of human values. At
the same time, religions have often been invoked to condone immoral and unjust acts
toward women, downtrodden, animals as well as other religions. I believe while different
religions do propound diverse world-views, yet if we strive to delineate foundational values
of every religion then we would realise that almost same set of cardinal values are being
propagated by each one of them, namely, love, compassion, forgiveness and so on.
One shall strive to discern truth from propaganda, such a pursuit is bound to culminate into

Page | 50
‘transvaluation of values’, that is, values can be reviewed and redefined significanly. Only a
life of critical outlook can enable one to comprehend religious truths in true sense of the
term and thereby evolve further to have a life of autonomy. Such an autonomous being will
respect people’s choice with regard to food and life partner, and will understand that
religious conversion is of no significance, what needs to be reviewed constantly is the
dogmatic and uncritical assumptions pertaining to life.
(b)I would exhort my friend to listen to the original inner voice- voice of conscience, which
is not embedded in bodily instincts or desires, which transcends social, cultural, religious,
political, linguistic, sexual and regional identities. I will suggest my friend to draw
inspiration from Jaina tirthankars who have conquered anger, greed, arrogance and
delusion. That is, a true crusader is not the one who is ready to kill people but one who has
tamed bodily temptations and weaknesses. One should strive to inculcate ‘sarva dharma
sambhava’ and do one’s utmost to create a cohesive society where people of diverse
religions can live harmoniously and autonomously, with a sense of mutual respect and
tolerance.
One shall learn from Aristotle that we are social beings, our personal good cannot be
realized in complete isolation, the highest good that an individual can realize is attainable
only at the level of community. That is, ‘good of one is contained in the good of all’.
Similarly, Chinese tradition Taoism reiterates that nature is multifaceted and diverse, thus, a
good life is when we learn to synchronize our being with the nature as such, any attempt to
alter the basic character of nature may prove detrimental to us.
(c)I would equate ‘radicalisation’ with ‘knowledge without integrity, a state of life where an
individual has adopted dogmatic conceptions of life and one is not ready to investigate what
is told to one. One may take things for granted and one would not invoke one’s originality
and uniqueness. It cannot be regarded as an authentic existence, since there is no effort to be
oneself, one may blindly adhere to a given norm who’s authenticity and validity is yet to be
ascertained. Such a life is a life of conformism, it can be a life of dogmatic slumber where
there will be no urge to be critical. Such a life can be dangerous and dreadful, it will be a
life without accountability.
Q.18: Case Study: Sangeeta is an IAS aspirant and preparing for the civil services exam.
After writing Prelims she visits her native village to see her parents, she is their only child.
After exchanging pleasantries, her parents apprise her of forthcoming Panchayat elections
and express the wish that they want her to contest the election and to serve the villagers.
They point out that their constituency is reserved for women and that the native women-folk
are not educated and qualified enough to fit the bill. Her parents are of the view that if she
wants to serve humanity by becoming a civil servant then the same end can be realized by
becoming a Sarpanch as well, and what can be better than serve the people of your native
village. At the same time, such a way of life will enable them to live together as a family,
she will be able to take good care of them and thereby she will not merely remain a
daughter but shall become more like a son to them. Moreover, they claim that she can easily
win the election because of her academic credentials, caste configurations and her equations
with the villagers; on the other hand, so much uncertainties are involved in the Civil
Services Exam which is a multi-layered national level competitive exam with very low
success rate.
Page | 51
However, Sangeeta has always believed that reservation is unethical, whether given on the
basis of sex, caste or economic criteria. She is of the view that such measures degrade the
merit and perpetuate mediocrity. Also, rather than integrating people into a cohesive
society, such enactments aggravate the discriminations and proliferate subjugation and
hostilities. Also, she is of the opinion that conscientious people shall not join politics since
it is the sphere of life that is immune from moral considerations.
(a) Examine the ethical issues involved in the above case.
(b) What would be your advice to Sangeeta? Explain with suitable illustrations and due
justifications.
Ans: (a) The principal ethical issues are as follows:
1. The obligations of child towards parents.
2. Ethics and Politics.
3. Role of woman.
4. The ethics of reservation.
The institution of family is one of its own kind, where we all have mutual obligations to
each other. In classical Indian traditions, we have the narratives of matri and pitri rna , that
is, a child owes immensely to parents and with a sense of gratitude one shall strive to pay
that debt off in every possible manner. Thus, it can be argued that a child has an obligation
to fulfill each and every wish of the parents.
It is often stated that politics is that sphere of life which is immune from moral scrutiny,
political success is not in commensurate with one’s virtuous character but with expedient
manipulations. However, I am of the view that no realm of life, whether at the level of
thought, word or deed, shall remain immune from moral scrutiny. Politics shall not,
primarily, be about winning the election by hook or by crook but to stand for the highest
ideals of life, to safeguard the most fundamental and cardinal values and to disseminate
service to humanity. Thus, conscientious people, alone, should join politics.
The women-folk have always been prescribed conventional roles, where they are not
allowed to be themselves and they remain confined to the domestic chores. They are not
given education, nor are they allowed to lead a life of autonomy and self reliance. But as
and when they have got an opportunity to be themselves, they have defied the prevailing
misconceptions, have conquered the so called male bastions with ease and finesse.
Moreover, a girl can take good care of her parents by being herself, the notion of ‘good
daughter’ shall not be defined with reference to ‘son’.
It is often argued that reservation is unethical and it can never be the means to create a
cohesive and integrated society, since, on the one hand, it emphasizes socio-cultural and
sexual identities rather than transcending them and, on the other, it undermines the merit
and perpetuates mediocrity. I am of the view that development in the true sense of the term
implies the self-realization or self-actualization, not only of some humans but of the totality
of nature as such, forming an organic whole that consists of humans, biotic and abiotic
components. Such an all round, holistic progression can be realized through a multipronged
charter of actions, and affirmative action in the form of reservation can be one such
endeavour. The inequities and disparities, prevailing in every spheres of life, namely, social,
educational, economics, cultural and political can be very effectively bridged through the
Page | 52
path of reservation. However, the ethical discourse to understand the rightness or wrongness
of reservation cannot be undertaken by an agent who is aware of one’s individuality either
as a beneficiary or as a sufferer, such an agent must be an impersonal self, without any
social, cultural, political and sexual identities, somewhat like the ‘veil of ignorance’ of
Rawls. Reservation can never be a panacea but it can be one of the most efficient means to
empower underprivileged and downtrodden socially, educationally, economically and
politically.
(b)My advice to Sangeeta would be what Buddha has advised to humanity-
atmadipobhavah, be a light unto yourself. One must strive to be autonomous, self-reliant
and be what one believes one ought to be. Such a life will be a life of integrity and inner
tranquility, it will culminate into a life of self-realization, both at the level of individual as
well as at the level of collectivity. This will enable her to disseminate service to humanity in
true sense of the term.
One must listen to everyone in all fairness and through a deliberative engagement
conceptualise one’s ideal self and the highest ideals of life. At the same time, one must have
the resolve to live in complete pursuit of ideal self in accordance with the highest ideals and
principles. Sangeeta herself shall decide whether she ought to be an IAS or a Sarpanch.
Every individual can be a unique being, we all may have our respective aptitudes and
aspirations to realize. Thus, rather than trying to be someone else or blindly emulating
others, I believe it is better to take a ‘Leap of Faith’. For instance, Sachin Tendulkar could
become the ‘God of cricket’ only because he was convinced of himself and his ideal self.
Again, one must not be deterred by failures nor shall be elated by some success, like Sthita
pragya of Bhagavad Gita, with a sense of perseverance and earnestness one should perform
one’s duty with absolute commitment, with a sense of duty alone, without speculating about
the results. Since action alone is in our purview not the result. That is, life is less about
being an IAS or a politician, primarily life is about inculcating a quest to have an authentic
existence, life is an ever-evolving process where one shall strive to discover, rediscover,
define and redefine the foundational values of life. One must have an urge to evolve oneself
on a regular basis and thereby pave the path to create a life where we all can have a life of
self respect and dignity through interpersonal deliberations. Such a life will eventually
culminate in to the sovereignty and the welfare of we the people.
Q.19: Case Study: You are preparing for the Civil Services exam and residing in the State
Capital. After Prelims you visit your native village for few days to meet your parents. While
being there, you get to know that Community Panchayat has issued a Charter of Duties for
the girls and women of the village. As per the dictates, the women folks ought not to wear
jeans and shall not carry personal mobiles. You also learn that the sex ratio of girl child vis-
à-vis boy, in the age group of 0-5, is dismal. At the same time, there have been alleged cases
of honour killings for marrying among the taboo gotras. All these developments outrage you
to the core and you resolve to make amend. However, your family advises you to focus on
your forthcoming Mains exam rather than wasting time in the futile exercise.
(i) What would you do under the given circumstances?
(ii) Bring out and discuss the ethical issues involved in the above case.
(iii) What do you understand by empowerment? Suggest measures for women

Page | 53
empowerment.
Ans: (i) I believe it is the responsibility of every individual to act as a moral aspirant in
every walk of the life. By ‘moral aspirant’ I understand having critical outlook towards life,
whereby one ought to question dogmas, prejudices and uncritical assumptions of life and
value system. Thus, under the given circumstances I would have no option but to act like a
moral aspirant and to uphold moral and Constitutional ideals.
Unfortunately, women have been subjugated in every possible form in every sphere of
human life. The structure of the human society has remained androcentric, men have
occupied the central position while women have been at the periphery. Men are regarded as
ends while women are treated as means. The discrimination and subordination of women
have been justified on grounds of biological differences. However, feminists distinguish
between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’. ‘Sex’ refers to biological differences whereas ‘gender’ refers to
differences that are imposed by social norms. As Simone de Beauvoir says, “One is not
born, but is made a woman”. The dictates of the Community Panchayat and poor sex-ratio
manifest the same world-view.
Customs and conventions cannot be reformed overnight, however, in this case if we strive
to empower women folk through right orientation and education, and inculcate a sense of
self-reliance in them whereby they can be given right to self-determination, then significant
improvement can be noticed in a short period of time. Thus, I would try to sow the seeds of
such engagement at the level of community and by involving administrative institutions.
Specific problems like gotra taboo etc. will be dissolved on its own once we try to
restructure the very fabric of patriarchal society with androgynous society, an equal
opportunity society.
I believe education goes beyond the realm of books and the best way to learn is to study the
book of life. Thus, I can continue with my preparation and at the same time I will try to
spread awareness about the issues of women in my village through different mode of
communication.
(ii) The principal ethical issues are subordination of women, subverting their right to life,
not granting them autonomy and respect as equal. Imposing unjust and illegal restrictions
and limitations on them by undermining their basic right to self-determination. It involves
uncritical assumption that socio-cultural identities are too sacrosanct to be questioned or
defied and even killing is a just punishment for such an act of violation.
(iii) Empowerment can be regarded as a state of autonomy, sovereignty, where one can have
complete control over one’s life and one shall be treated as an end rather than as a means.
Thus, an empowered woman will be self-reliant and will have independence in every sphere
of life- social, economic, political and religious.
In order to realize women empowerment, education can play the most significant role.
Women have to be educated to be aware of their rights and privileges. Most importantly, we
ought to get rid of patriarchal mindset and conventions from every sphere of life. It is
argued that equality within home would make gender equality possible in all other areas of
life. Political equality through reservation of seats in the parliament and legislative
assembly can be a major step.
The process of land and property distribution within the family is crucial in determining the

Page | 54
status of women as social beings and as citizens. The prevailing patterns of male ownership
and control over resources have further consolidated and perpetuated the gender bias against
women.
Another serious challenge is to eradicate female foeticide and infanticide.
Unless women are empowered and take a decisive part in the social, political and economic
life of the country, the very development of the country will be adversely affected.

Page | 55