Easy2Siksha
GNDU Queson Paper 2021
BA 5
th
Semester
PHILOSOPHY
(Western Metaphysics and Epistemology)
Time Allowed: 3 Hours Maximum Marks: 100
Note: Aempt Five quesons in all, selecng at least One queson from each secon. The
Fih queson may be aempted from any secon. All quesons carry equal marks.
SECTION-A
1. Examine the nature and concerns of Western Philosophy at length.
2. Explain Berkeley's subjecve idealism' by duly highlighng the logical limitaons that
get generated by his theory.,
SECTION-B
3. What are the grounds of Descarte's philosophy of Dualism? Explain.
4. Discuss the philosophical assumpons of Pluralism of Leibnitz.
SECTION-C
5. Discuss the fundamental teachings of Raonalism as a philosophical discourse.
Easy2Siksha
6. Explain the fundamental tenets of Intuionism.
SECTION-D
7. Discuss the basis of Existenal Philosophy.
8. Examine the philosophical foundaons of Logical Posivism.
Easy2Siksha
GNDU Answer Paper 2021
BA 5
th
Semester
PHILOSOPHY
(Western Metaphysics and Epistemology)
Time Allowed: 3 Hours Maximum Marks: 100
Note: Aempt Five quesons in all, selecng at least One queson from each secon. The
Fih queson may be aempted from any secon. All quesons carry equal marks.
SECTION-A
1. Examine the nature and concerns of Western Philosophy at length.
Ans: Nature and Concerns of Western Philosophy
Let us imagine ourselves on a journey through me, across centuries and connents, sing
among great minds who shaped the way we think about life, knowledge, truth, morality, and
the universe. This journey is what we call the exploraon of Western Philosophy.
Western philosophy, unlike some myscal or purely spiritual tradions, is deeply concerned
with asking quesons, seeking answers based on logic and reason, and trying to understand
the world in a raonal way. It is not just about abstract ideas — it's about how humans think,
behave, and live together. Let’s break this down step by step.
1. What is the Nature of Western Philosophy?
➤ A Raonal Quest for Truth
The nature of Western philosophy is raonal. Philosophers in the Western tradion have
always asked, “Why?” and “How do we know?” and “What is real?” They look for reasoned
arguments rather than just accepng tradions, myths, or supernatural explanaons.
Take Socrates, the father of Western philosophy. He walked around Athens asking people
quesons like, “What is jusce?” or “What is goodness?” He didn’t give answers but instead
challenged people to think crically.
Easy2Siksha
Western philosophy is not about memorizing answers — it's about learning how to queson,
how to argue logically, and how to understand life from mulple perspecves.
2. Major Branches of Western Philosophy
To understand the concerns of Western philosophy, we need to look at its major branches:
a) Metaphysics – What is Reality?
Metaphysics asks:
• What exists?
• What is the nature of the universe?
• Do we have free will?
For example, Plato believed in a world of perfect “Forms” beyond our physical reality. His
student, Aristotle, focused more on the physical world and how things funcon.
Today, quesons of metaphysics include discussions about me, space, the mind, and the
existence of God.
b) Epistemology – What is Knowledge?
Epistemology is the study of knowledge. It asks:
• What do we know?
• How do we know it?
• Can we be sure of anything?
René Descartes, a French philosopher, famously said, “I think, therefore I am” (Cogito, ergo
sum). He doubted everything unl he found a foundaon for knowledge — his own
consciousness.
Epistemology concerns things like truth, belief, and juscaon — very important in science,
law, and even journalism today.
c) Ethics – What is the Right Thing to Do?
Ethics, or moral philosophy, deals with quesons of right and wrong, good and evil.
• Socrates asked whether it is beer to suer injusce or to commit it.
• Kant proposed that acons must follow a universal moral law — the “categorical
imperave.”
• Ulitarians like Bentham and Mill argued that acons are right if they promote the
greatest happiness.
Ethics applies to real-world issues: bioethics, jusce, human rights, business ethics, etc.
Easy2Siksha
d) Polical Philosophy – How Should We Live Together?
This branch focuses on governments, society, and jusce.
• Plato’s Republic imagined a just society ruled by philosopher-kings.
• John Locke wrote about individual rights and freedom, which inspired democrac
revoluons.
• Karl Marx cricized capitalism and imagined a classless society.
Polical philosophy aects how we think about law, equality, freedom, and power.
e) Logic – The Rules of Reasoning
Logic teaches us how to argue properly, spot fallacies, and draw valid conclusions. Without
logic, philosophy (and science) would fall apart.
3. Key Concerns of Western Philosophy
A. The Search for Truth
From ancient Greece to modern mes, Western philosophers have been obsessed with the
truth. But they don't just believe anything — they analyze, crique, and debate.
Philosophers ask:
• Is truth absolute or relave?
• Can we ever really know the truth?
This concern with truth led to the rise of science, crical thinking, and secular reasoning.
B. The Individual and Freedom
Western thought oen centers on the individual — not just as part of a group, but as a
thinking, feeling, moral agent.
• The Greek Stoics believed in self-control and inner peace.
• The Enlightenment thinkers believed in reason, freedom, and individual rights.
• Existenalists like Jean-Paul Sartre said that we are “condemned to be free” —
meaning we are responsible for making our own choices.
Freedom, self-identy, and personal responsibility are big concerns in modern Western
philosophy.
C. Ethics and the Good Life
Easy2Siksha
Philosophers ask:
• What is a good life?
• Is happiness the goal of life?
• Should we follow duty, desire, or divine will?
Aristotle said the good life is one of virtue and reason — living in a balanced and purposeful
way.
Kant believed we should follow moral duty, even if it doesn’t bring us happiness.
Nietzsche challenged tradional morality and called for the creaon of new values.
These debates connue today in quesons about meaning, success, and well-being.
D. God and Religion
Many Western philosophers have explored the existence of God, the problem of evil, and
the relaonship between faith and reason.
• Aquinas used philosophy to prove God's existence using reason.
• David Hume and Nietzsche quesoned religious belief and emphasized skepcism.
• Today, philosophy of religion includes debates between atheism, agnoscism, theism,
and spiritual pluralism.
E. Society, Jusce, and Power
Western philosophy has always asked:
• What is jusce?
• How should power be used?
• What is a fair society?
From Plato’s Republic to Rawls’ Theory of Jusce, philosophers have tried to imagine ideal
sociees and systems of rights and equality.
These concerns are central to modern discussions on democracy, feminism, race,
environmental jusce, and more.
4. Western vs. Eastern Philosophy: A Note
Western philosophy focuses on analysis, argument, and individual reasoning.
Eastern tradions like Indian or Chinese philosophy (e.g., Vedanta, Buddhism, Taoism) focus
more on harmony, inner peace, and spiritual unity.
Easy2Siksha
Both tradions ask deep quesons — but the methods and worldviews dier. Western
thought tends to separate mind and body, human and nature; Eastern thought sees
interconnectedness.
5. Famous Western Philosophers at a Glance
Let’s quickly meet some key gures:
Philosopher
Key Idea
Socrates
Quesoning is the path to wisdom
Plato
World of Forms – ideal vs. real world
Aristotle
Logic, virtue, and praccal wisdom
Descartes
Doubt and raonalism — “I think, therefore I am”
Kant
Morality based on reason and duty
Hume
Empiricism and skepcism
Nietzsche
Crique of morality and religion
Sartre
Existenal freedom and responsibility
John Locke
Rights, liberty, and the social contract
Karl Marx
Class struggle and social change
6. Why Study Western Philosophy Today?
Even in today's fast-paced world, Western philosophy remains important because it helps us:
• Think crically and logically
• Understand ethical and social issues
• Reect on personal values and life goals
• Parcipate in democracy and public debate
• Make decisions with reason, not just emoon or belief
Philosophy doesn’t give easy answers. But it teaches us how to think, how to argue, and how
to live with awareness.
Easy2Siksha
Conclusion: A Never-Ending Dialogue
Western philosophy is not a closed book — it is a conversaon across me. Every new
generaon adds new voices. From Socrates to Simone de Beauvoir, from Plato to Cornel
West, it’s a grand journey of human thought.
Philosophy gives us the tools to understand ourselves and the world. In a me of rapid
change, confusion, and conict, its concerns — truth, jusce, freedom, reason — are more
relevant than ever.
So, let’s not see philosophy as boring or outdated. It’s actually a powerful, living guide to the
most important quesons of life.
2. Explain Berkeley's subjecve idealism' by duly highlighng the logical limitaons that
get generated by his theory.,
Ans: Berkeley's Subjecve Idealism: Explained Simply
1. Introducon: Imagine a World Without Maer
Let’s begin with a small thought experiment. Imagine you walk into your room, and suddenly
someone tells you: “Actually, your bed, books, and even your body don’t exist
independently. They exist only because you are perceiving them.” Strange, right?
This is not just a fantasy. This is the core idea of Berkeley’s philosophy, known as Subjecve
Idealism.
2. Who was Berkeley?
George Berkeley (1685–1753) was an Irish philosopher and clergyman. He was one of the
most inuenal thinkers of the early modern period and is best known for his theory called
"Subjecve Idealism" or somemes "Immaterialism."
Berkeley believed that all things only exist as percepons in the mind. There is no such thing
as "material substance" or maer. In his view:
"To be is to be perceived."
(Esse est percipi)
So if no one is looking at a tree, does the tree even exist? According to Berkeley, not unless
it’s being perceived—either by a human mind or by the mind of God.
3. The Historical Background: Fighng Materialism and Skepcism
Easy2Siksha
In Berkeley’s me, many sciensts and philosophers—like John Locke and Isaac Newton—
were promong a mechanical and material view of the world. They believed that:
• There is a material world made of solid maer.
• Our senses give us informaon about this material world.
• The mind is separate from the world and receives informaon from it.
But Berkeley thought this view was dangerous. Why?
• It led to skepcism—if all we know comes from the senses, how do we know the
world really exists?
• It also supported atheism—if the world runs on mechanical laws, where is God?
So, Berkeley had a mission: protect religion, human knowledge, and the role of the mind.
And for this, he came up with Subjecve Idealism.
4. Core Ideas of Subjecve Idealism
Let’s break his theory into simple ideas:
(A) We only know ideas, not maer
Berkeley argues that all we ever experience are ideas—the things we see, touch, hear, etc.
For example:
• The redness of an apple is an idea.
• The taste of chocolate is an idea.
• The coldness of ice is an idea.
We never directly experience maer itself. We only know what our mind perceives. So, why
assume that there is a mysterious material substance behind our ideas?
(B) Maer doesn’t exist
Berkeley takes a bold step: if we can't perceive maer, then it doesn't exist. The only things
that exist are:
1. Ideas (things we perceive)
2. Minds (the things that perceive)
No third category—no “material substance” that exists independently of percepon.
(C) Objects are collecons of ideas
A tree is not a material object out there. It is a collecon of ideas—green, tall, rough, leafy—
which exist in your mind. When you walk away from the tree, the ideas leave your mind. So,
does the tree disappear?
Easy2Siksha
Not exactly. Berkeley says:
Even when no human is perceiving the tree, God is. And because God is always perceiving
everything, the world connues to exist.
5. Simple Example: The Apple
Let’s imagine an apple on the table.
• When you look at it, you see its red color.
• You smell its sweetness.
• You bite it and feel its texture and taste.
These are ideas in your mind.
Now suppose you walk out of the room.
• Is the apple sll there?
According to materialism: yes, the apple sll exists as a material object.
But according to Berkeley: the apple exists only if it is being perceived. So how does it
connue to exist when you’re not there?
God is always perceiving the apple. That’s why it doesn’t vanish.
So for Berkeley, God is the great perceiver who keeps the world “on” like a divine screen that
never turns o.
6. Berkeley’s Aack on Abstract Ideas
Another key part of Berkeley’s philosophy is his rejecon of “abstract ideas.”
For example, philosophers like Locke said that we have an abstract idea of a triangle that
doesn’t have any specic size or shape.
Berkeley rejected this. He said:
• You can’t imagine a triangle that is not specic in size or shape. You can’t see a
“general triangle” in your mind.
• So he argued that all knowledge comes from parcular, concrete experiences, not
from abstract concepts.
7. Role of God in Berkeley’s Theory
You may wonder—if everything exists only in the mind, how does the world remain stable?
Easy2Siksha
Berkeley answers: God is the ulmate mind.
• God perceives everything, all the me.
• That’s why the world doesn’t disappear when no humans are looking.
• God gives regularity to nature, just like science explains.
This way, Berkeley brings religion and science together: the laws of nature work because
God ensures the order.
8. Logical Limitaons of Berkeley’s Theory
Berkeley’s theory is clever, but many philosophers have cricized it. Let’s explore some
logical limitaons and problems.
(A) Solipsism: Am I the only mind?
If everything I know exists only in my mind, how do I know other people exist?
• Maybe I’m the only mind, and everyone else is just an idea in my head!
• This is called solipsism, and Berkeley’s theory leads dangerously close to it.
(B) Too much reliance on God
Berkeley solves many problems by saying “God is perceiving everything.” But this feels like
an easy escape. Some argue:
• How do we know God is perceiving the world?
• Why bring in theology to explain everyday percepon?
(C) Scienc dicules
Science is based on the idea that there is an objecve, material world that obeys physical
laws.
But Berkeley says the world is just ideas in minds.
• This makes it hard to explain things like gravity, atoms, or viruses—since they exist
even when no one is thinking about them.
• Science needs an external, independent world, which Berkeley denies.
(D) Experience vs. Reality
Just because we experience something doesn’t mean it exists only in our minds.
For example:
• I see the sun rise every day.
• But we now know it’s actually the Earth rotang.
Easy2Siksha
So percepon can be decepve, and the world doesn’t always match what we perceive.
Berkeley doesn’t give enough space for this mismatch.
9. Berkeley’s Lasng Contribuon
Despite these limitaons, Berkeley’s ideas were very inuenal.
• He challenged the blind belief in materialism.
• He made people think deeply about the role of the mind in shaping reality.
• His theory helped develop later phenomenology and idealism, inuencing
philosophers like Hegel and Kant.
10. Conclusion: The Mind-Centered World
Berkeley’s Subjecve Idealism is like a beauful but strange dream:
• A world where nothing exists unless it is perceived.
• A world held together not by atoms, but by ideas and minds.
• A reality that depends not on solid maer, but on the act of seeing, feeling, and
experiencing.
While it has its logical aws—especially its over-reliance on God and potenal to lead to
solipsism—it remains a fascinang journey into the power of the human mind and the
mystery of existence.
SECTION-B
3. What are the grounds of Descarte's philosophy of Dualism? Explain.
Ans: Introducon: Meet René Descartes
Imagine a curious man, sing by a replace in a small room in 17th-century France. It’s
quiet outside, but inside his mind, a storm of quesons is rising. Who am I? What is real?
Can I trust my senses? This man is René Descartes, one of the most important philosophers
in Western history. He is oen called the "Father of Modern Philosophy."
Descartes wanted to build philosophy like a solid building—from a strong foundaon
upward. And from that eort came one of his most famous ideas: Dualism.
What is Descartes’ Dualism?
Easy2Siksha
In simple words, Descartes’ dualism is the belief that there are two kinds of substances or
realies in the world:
1. Mind (or Soul) – the thinking, non-material part of us
2. Body – the physical, material part made of maer
He believed that the mind and the body are separate and disnct from each other, though
they interact.
This theory is known as Cartesian Dualism, and it became a major idea in philosophy,
science, and psychology.
The Background: Why Did Descartes Think This Way?
Let’s step into Descartes’ shoes.
At that me, science and religion were oen in conict. Religion said the soul lives forever.
But science looked at the body like a machine. Descartes wanted to bring clarity. He believed
that by using reason, he could nd truth—truth that would work both for science and
religion.
He decided to doubt everything unl he could nd something that could not be doubted. He
called this the method of doubt.
Step-by-Step Grounds of Descartes’ Dualism
Let’s walk through the logical path that Descartes took to reach Dualism.
1. Methodical Doubt – “I Doubt, Therefore…”
Descartes started by doubng everything:
• Can I trust my senses? Somemes they deceive me.
• Am I dreaming? I can’t always tell.
• Could an evil demon be fooling me? Maybe.
But even if everything is false, one thing is certain: “I am thinking.” Even if he is being
tricked, someone must be thinking.
And that led to the most famous line:
“Cogito, ergo sum” – I think, therefore I am.
This was his rst truth. He could not doubt that he exists as a thinking being.
So he realized: Even if my body is not real, my mind is real because it is thinking.
Easy2Siksha
2. Mind is Dierent from Body
Now, Descartes asked: “What am I?”
He said: I am a thinking thing. My mind is not extended in space. It doesn’t have a shape or
size. It is completely dierent from the body, which is extended, shaped, and can be touched
or moved.
Thus, he concluded:
The mind and body are two dierent substances:
• The mind: non-material, can think
• The body: material, cannot think
So, dualism was born.
3. Clear and Disnct Percepons
Descartes also used what he called the rule of "clear and disnct percepons." If something
is clear and disnct in the mind, it must be true.
He said:
• I clearly understand that I am a thinking thing.
• I clearly understand that my body is a non-thinking, extended thing.
• Since I can clearly and disnctly understand them separately, they must be two
separate things.
4. God and the Soul
Descartes also used God to support his dualism. He said:
• God is perfect and not a deceiver.
• God made us with minds that can understand truth.
• Therefore, when we clearly understand that the mind and body are separate, we can
trust that it is true.
This also t well with the religious belief that the soul is immortal and can exist without the
body.
5. Mind-Body Interacon
Easy2Siksha
But wait—if the mind and body are separate, how do they interact? For example:
• If I decide to raise my hand (a mental act), my hand moves (a physical result).
• If I touch something hot (a physical event), I feel pain (a mental experience).
Descartes said the mind and body interact in the brain, specically in the pineal gland (a
small part in the center of the brain). Today, sciensts don’t accept that exact idea, but it
was his aempt to explain the connecon.
Example from Daily Life
Imagine you’re scared while watching a horror movie. You feel cold, your heart races, you
sweat. Your mind experiences fear (a thought), and your body reacts physically. Descartes
would say: your non-material mind is interacng with your material body.
Cricism of Descartes’ Dualism
Though Descartes' dualism was revoluonary, many philosophers and sciensts cricized it:
• How exactly do two totally dierent substances interact?
• The mind has no physical locaon—so how does it cause the body to move?
• Modern neuroscience shows that mental processes are linked to brain acvity, which
challenges the idea of a completely separate mind.
Yet, his ideas laid the groundwork for modern debates in philosophy of mind, psychology,
and neuroscience.
Conclusion: Why Descartes' Dualism Sll Maers
Descartes’ Dualism was not just about spling mind and body. It was about nding certainty
in an uncertain world. He gave us a way to understand the inner self as separate from the
outer body, and that shaped science, religion, medicine, and even how we see ourselves
today.
His famous “I think, therefore I am” reminds us that our ability to think is the root of our
existence, and that there might be more to us than just our physical form.
So next me you wonder “Who am I really?”—remember Descartes sing by the re,
doubng everything, unl he found the one truth no one could take away.
Easy2Siksha
4. Discuss the philosophical assumpons of Pluralism of Leibnitz.
Ans: Philosophical Assumpons of Pluralism of Leibniz
(Explained Like a Story)
Imagine you are walking through a garden. You see owers blooming, birds chirping, ants
building their hills, clouds moving above, and people strolling around. Everything is dierent
yet beaufully organized. You might wonder: “Who manages this harmony? How can so
many things, all so dierent, exist together without falling into chaos?”
This is exactly what the German philosopher Goried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) tried to
answer through his theory of Pluralism.
Now, let’s explore this concept step by step, just like peeling the layers of an onion.
What is Pluralism According to Leibniz?
Pluralism, in simple terms, is the belief that reality is made up of many things, not just one.
Unlike monists like Spinoza (who believed everything is one substance), Leibniz believed that
the universe is made up of countless ny, individual units called “monads.”
But what are monads?
Think of monads as ny spiritual atoms, like souls, but not just human souls—every object,
whether living or non-living, is made of monads. Even a rock, a tree, or a droplet of water
has monads in it. Each monad is a windowless, indivisible, and independent unit of force or
energy.
Assumpons Behind Leibniz's Pluralism
Let’s break down the key philosophical assumpons that build this fascinang idea of
pluralism.
1. Reality Is Composed of Monads (Many, Not One)
The rst assumpon is that reality is not one big thing but made up of many separate things.
Leibniz rejected the idea that there’s only one substance in the universe. Instead, he argued
that monads are the building blocks of everything.
Each monad is like a small mirror reecng the enre universe from its own point of view.
But they don’t interact with each other physically—this is important.
Imagine you and your friend are watching the same movie, but on separate screens, in
dierent rooms. You're watching the same events, but you aren't interacng with each
other. Monads are like that.
Easy2Siksha
2. Monads Do Not Interact – Pre-established Harmony
Here’s where it gets even more interesng.
Leibniz believed that monads don’t physically aect one another. So how does everything
stay so organized in this complex world?
The answer lies in God’s divine planning, or what Leibniz called “pre-established harmony.”
Just like a clockmaker sets two clocks to show the same me, God created all monads in
such a way that they appear to be interacng, but really, they are just following their own
internal programming.
So, everything seems connected, but it's not because of physical contact—it’s because of the
perfect internal design of each monad from the beginning.
3. Each Monad is Unique and Has Its Own Perspecve
Every monad is individual and has its own percepon of the universe. Some monads are very
basic (like those in stones), while others are more advanced (like those in humans).
Think of it like a scale:
• At the lowest level, monads have vague percepons (like a sleeping person).
• At the middle level, monads in animals have feelings and awareness.
• At the highest level, monads in human beings have reason and self-consciousness.
This idea shows Leibniz’s belief in progress and purpose in nature. Everything is going
somewhere, trying to become more aware, more perfect.
4. God is the Supreme Monad
Another big assumpon is that God is the highest and the rst monad, the creator of all
other monads. He has complete knowledge and is the source of the pre-established
harmony.
So in Leibniz’s pluralisc world, everything exists because God willed it. Every monad is born
with a specic purpose and design.
5. No Monad Is Ever Destroyed
Leibniz also believed in the indestrucbility of monads. They cannot be broken or physically
destroyed. Once created, a monad exists forever. What changes is the state of its awareness
or consciousness.
Easy2Siksha
This es in with his view that reality is eternal and spiritual—not just mechanical or material
like in other philosophies of his me.
6. The Principle of Sucient Reason
Leibniz's philosophy also rests on the principle of sucient reason—the idea that nothing
happens without a reason. Every monad, every event, every change—has a reason behind it.
This assumpon makes Leibniz’s pluralism not just about many things exisng, but about
those many things exisng purposefully and logically.
Conclusion: A World of Harmony Made of Many Minds
Leibniz’s pluralism paints a poec picture of reality. Instead of a chaoc mess of things
bumping into each other, it sees the universe as a divine symphony, where each monad plays
its own silent tune, perfectly med by the great composer—God.
His pluralism teaches us that:
• Reality is spiritual, not just material.
• Every being has value and purpose.
• Harmony doesn’t need physical interacon—it can come from design.
• Everything has a reason for being.
Leibniz didn’t just give us a philosophy; he gave us a hopeful vision of a meaningful, well-
organized universe.
SECTION-C
5. Discuss the fundamental teachings of Raonalism as a philosophical discourse.
Ans: Fundamental Teachings of Raonalism – A Simple and Meaningful Explanaon
Let’s imagine a young philosopher named Arjun who always wondered, “How do we know
what is true?” He would sit under a tree, gazing at the stars, quesoning whether everything
we learn through our eyes and ears is actually reliable. One day, his wise teacher told him
about a powerful idea – Raonalism.
Raonalism is a philosophical school of thought that tells us:
“The best way to know truth is not through the senses, but through the mind.”
Sounds interesng, right? Let’s walk with Arjun on his journey to understand the
fundamental teachings of Raonalism – step by step, like a story of discovery.
Easy2Siksha
1. Knowledge Comes from Reason, Not Senses
One day, Arjun touched a hot cup of tea and said, “Ah! It’s hot.” But then he thought, “What
if someone else touches the same cup and feels it dierently?” His teacher said, “That’s why
Raonalists believe that our senses can somemes deceive us. True knowledge doesn’t
come from what we see or touch — it comes from thinking and reasoning.”
So the rst teaching of Raonalism is:
“Reason is the primary source of knowledge.”
Famous Raonalist philosophers like René Descartes, Baruch Spinoza, and Goried Leibniz
all believed that pure thought can lead us to truths that are universal and unchanging –
unlike our senses which oen change.
2. Innate Ideas Exist in the Mind
Arjun once asked, “How do babies know how to cry for food? Who taught them that?” His
teacher smiled and said, “Some knowledge is already inside us from birth.”
Raonalists believe in something called innate ideas – these are ideas we are born with, like
the idea of God, morality, mathemacs, or perfecon. Descartes famously said that we all
have a natural idea of a perfect being (God), and we didn’t learn it from outside – it was
already within us.
So, second teaching of Raonalism is:
“The mind contains ideas that are present from birth.”
It’s like saying, you don’t have to see every triangle in the world to know that the sum of its
angles is always 180° – your mind can understand it just by reasoning.
3. Deducve Logic Over Empirical Evidence
Let’s say Arjun hears someone say, “All humans are mortal. Socrates is a human. Therefore,
Socrates is mortal.” This is deducve reasoning – starng from general truths and reaching
specic conclusions.
Raonalists love this method. They believe that using logic, step-by-step, can bring us closer
to truth. They value this more than experiments or observaons.
Thus, the third teaching of Raonalism is:
“Truth can be discovered through deducve logic and reasoning.”
Think of it like solving a math problem — you don’t need to go outside and measure things.
You just sit, think, and use your brain.
Easy2Siksha
4. Mathemacal Truth as a Model for All Knowledge
One day, Arjun was studying math. He said, “2 + 2 will always be 4, no maer where I am.
That’s amazing!” His teacher nodded and said, “Exactly. That’s what Raonalists admire
about mathemacs – it is clear, certain, and universal.”
Raonalism teaches that knowledge should be as certain and logical as mathemacs. René
Descartes, for example, tried to build all human knowledge on the certainty of mathemacal
reasoning. That’s why Raonalism is oen seen as the foundaon of modern scienc and
logical thinking.
The fourth fundamental teaching is:
“Mathemacal reasoning is the ideal model for all knowledge.”
5. Doubt is the First Step to Certainty
Arjun once said, “I don’t believe something just because others say it. I want to understand it
myself.” His teacher said, “Good! That’s the Raonalist way.”
Raonalism encourages crical thinking and quesoning. Descartes famously said, “I think,
therefore I am” (Cogito, ergo sum). He doubted everything – his senses, the world, even his
own body – but the one thing he couldn’t doubt was that he was thinking.
The h key teaching is:
“Doubt everything unl you reach something that cannot be doubted.”
This method is called methodical doubt, and it’s how Raonalists begin their search for
absolute truth.
Conclusion: Why Raonalism Maers Today
So, what did Arjun learn from Raonalism?
He learned that:
• The mind is the true path to truth,
• Thinking logically is more powerful than just observing,
• We may have natural knowledge within us,
• And we must always be willing to queson before we believe.
Even today, Raonalism shapes how we approach science, ethics, mathemacs, and logic. It
tells us to trust our reasoning powers and not blindly follow what we see, hear, or are told. It
encourages independent thinking and the search for clear, unchanging truth.
Easy2Siksha
Raonalism is not just a philosophy—it’s a mindset. And in a world full of fake news,
misinformaon, and confusion, this mindset is more important than ever.
6. Explain the fundamental tenets of Intuionism.
Ans: Introducon: What is Intuionism?
Let’s start with a simple imaginaon.
Imagine you see a person drop their wallet on the road. No one is around. You pick it up and
immediately feel you should return it. You didn’t read a rule book or ask anyone what to
do—you just knew the right thing was to give it back.
That inner sense of right and wrong, that gut feeling, is what Intuionism is all about in
ethics.
Intuionism is a moral philosophy that says:
"We understand what is right or wrong through our moral intuion, not through
reasoning, logic, or experience."
It means that moral truths are self-evident—we can feel them the way we feel pain or see
color. You don’t need proof that hurng someone is wrong—you simply know it is wrong.
Let’s now explore this idea more deeply by breaking down the fundamental tenets of
Intuionism.
1. Moral Knowledge Comes Through Intuion
The central idea is:
➡ We know right and wrong through intuion.
Just like how you know 2 + 2 = 4 without having to prove it, some moral truths are instantly
clear to us. For example:
• Stealing is wrong.
• Helping others is good.
• Telling lies is usually bad.
Intuionists say these truths are like mathemacal axioms—they are basic and self-evident.
We just see their truth directly in our minds.
Example:
You see someone bullying a child. Even without being told, you feel it's wrong. That feeling—
that clear, deep understanding—is moral intuion.
Easy2Siksha
2. Moral Judgments Are Objecve
Another important tenet is:
➡ Moral truths exist independently of our opinions or culture.
That means:
• Killing an innocent person is wrong, no maer where you are.
• Love, kindness, and fairness are universally good values.
Whether someone believes it or not doesn’t change the truth. So Intuionism says moral
values are objecve, not created by society or religion.
Example:
Even if a society believes slavery is okay, intuionism holds that it is sll morally wrong.
3. Moral Terms Are Simple and Indenable
One of the famous supporters of Intuionism, G.E. Moore, argued that:
➡ "Good" is a simple, undenable quality.
You cannot dene "good" in terms of anything else like "what most people like" or "what
makes us happy." Just like you cannot dene "yellow" to someone born blind—similarly,
"good" is understood directly by our moral sense.
Think of it this way:
You can’t break down “good” into smaller parts. You just recognize it when you see it—just
like you recognize the taste of sugar.
4. We Can Make Moral Statements That Are True or False
Intuionism believes:
➡ Moral sentences can be objecvely true or false.
So, when someone says:
• “Charity is good.”
• “Torture is wrong.”
These are not just opinions. They are either true or false, just like facts.
This is dierent from people who say, “Right and wrong are just feelings or preferences.”
Intuionists argue that there’s a truth about morality, just like there are truths in science or
math.
Easy2Siksha
5. Moral Disagreements Come from Lack of Clarity, Not from the Absence of Truth
Somemes people disagree about what is right or wrong. But Intuionists say:
➡ Such disagreements happen because people are not thinking clearly, or their moral vision
is clouded.
It’s not because there is no moral truth. Everyone has moral intuion, but like eyesight, it
can get blurry due to emoons, ignorance, or personal bias.
Example:
Someone might believe revenge is good. But that’s because their emoons (anger, pain) are
clouding their moral intuion. Deep inside, their inner voice sll tells them forgiveness is
beer.
6. Moral Development is About Sharpening Intuion
Just like you train your mind to solve math problems or train your body to run faster, you can
also:
➡ Train your moral intuion to become sharper and clearer.
Through reecon, life experience, and listening to your conscience, your ability to "see"
what is right or wrong improves.
It’s like polishing a mirror—the clearer it gets, the beer it reects moral truth.
Cricism of Intuionism (Briey)
Although Intuionism is powerful and meaningful, some crics ask:
• How can we trust our intuion if dierent people feel dierent things?
• If morality is like color, why do cultures disagree on right and wrong?
• Can intuion alone guide us in complex situaons?
Despite these quesons, many sll value the core message of Intuionism—that deep
inside, we know what is right.
Conclusion: Why Intuionism Sll Maers
Let’s go back to the wallet story. You didn’t need anyone to teach you what’s right.
Something inside you just knew.
That’s the power of Intuionism—it reminds us that:
✔ Deep down, every human has a moral compass.
Easy2Siksha
✔ We don’t always need rules or religion to tell us what’s right.
✔ Somemes, our heart already knows.
SECTION-D
7. Discuss the basis of Existenal Philosophy.
Ans: The Background: What is Existenalism?
Existenalism is a philosophical movement that focuses on individual existence, freedom,
and choice. It believes that human beings create their own meaning in life. Unlike other
philosophies that depend on universal truths or religious doctrines, existenalism starts with
the individual, who feels lost, confused, or even anxious in the face of a meaningless or
uncertain world.
It’s not a single philosophy but a way of asking deep quesons like:
• Who am I?
• Why do I suer?
• Is there any purpose to life?
• How should I live when I feel uncertain or afraid?
The Historical Roots: Where Did It Come From?
The seeds of existenal thinking go back to ancient mes, but it truly grew in the 19th and
20th centuries.
• Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855) – A Danish philosopher and Chrisan thinker, he is
oen called the father of existenalism. He talked about the importance of personal
faith, individual choice, and inner struggle.
• Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) – A German philosopher who famously said, "God is
dead." He didn’t mean this literally, but he meant that people were losing belief in
tradional values. He encouraged people to create their own values.
• Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) – A French philosopher who made existenalism
famous. He believed that “existence precedes essence”, meaning we are born
without purpose, and it's up to us to give our life meaning through acons.
• Albert Camus (1913–1960) – He didn’t like being called an existenalist, but his idea
of “The Absurd” (the conict between our search for meaning and a meaningless
world) became a big part of existenal philosophy.
Easy2Siksha
The Core Ideas of Existenal Philosophy
Let’s break down the key ideas that form the basis of existenalism:
Existence Comes First
Existenalists believe that we exist rst, and only then do we dene ourselves. This is
dierent from the idea that we are born with a xed purpose (like "desny").
Example:
A knife is made with a purpose—to cut. That is its "essence."
But a human is not born with a xed purpose. You are not born to be a doctor, teacher, or
arst. You exist rst, and then you decide who you want to become.
Freedom of Choice
One of the most powerful (and scary) ideas in existenalism is that we are totally free to
choose what we want to be. There is no God, no fate, no outside force controlling us.
But this freedom comes with a cost — responsibility.
If you are free to choose, then you can’t blame others for your choices. You are responsible
for what you do.
Anguish, Anxiety, and Despair
When we realize that there is no xed path, and that we must choose for ourselves, we
oen feel anxiety, doubt, and fear.
This is called existenal anxiety — a deep feeling that comes when we see life has no
built-in meaning, and we must make our own.
Despair comes when things don’t go our way — but existenalists say it’s okay to feel
despair. It’s a part of being truly human.
Authencity
To live authencally means to live honestly, accepng your freedom and responsibility. It
means not pretending, not blindly following the crowd, and not lying to yourself.
If you are sad, admit it. If you love something, chase it. Don't be fake. That is authencity
— being true to your own chosen self.
The Absurd and Meaning
Easy2Siksha
Albert Camus introduced the idea of "The Absurd." He said that life oen feels absurd
because we are looking for meaning in a world that doesn’t give any.
Example: Imagine asking the universe, "What is my purpose?" and the universe stays
silent.
Camus said we must accept the absurd and sll live bravely — create our own meaning even
if the world gives us none.
Existenalism in Daily Life
Existenalism isn’t just a theory — it’s a way of thinking that aects our daily life.
• When you feel lost or unsure, existenalism tells you: That’s okay. That’s part of
being human.
• When you have to make a dicult decision, existenalism says: You are free to
choose. Just take responsibility.
• When you feel like life has no meaning, existenalism says: Create your own purpose.
Find something to live for.
Conclusion: A Philosophy for the Brave
Existenal philosophy is not always comforng, but it is real. It looks at the darkness, the
confusion, and the fear — and says:
"Yes, all of that exists. But sll, you can live a full and meaningful life — if you choose to."
It’s a philosophy that respects you — your emoons, your struggles, your freedom.
8. Examine the philosophical foundaons of Logical Posivism.
Ans: The Philosophical Foundaons of Logical Posivism
A Simple, Story-Like Explanaon
Imagine it’s the early 20th century in Europe—a me of rapid scienc progress, but also of
philosophical confusion. Sciensts are making groundbreaking discoveries in physics,
chemistry, and mathemacs, while philosophers are struggling to explain what knowledge
really means. Tradional metaphysics talks about God, soul, and reality beyond the senses—
but many thinkers begin to ask: How do we know these things are true? Can we trust such
claims?
Out of this storm of ideas emerges a powerful intellectual movement—Logical Posivism
(also called Logical Empiricism). It’s like a fresh breeze, aiming to clean the dust of vague and
speculave philosophy using the tools of logic and science.
Easy2Siksha
Let’s dive into the philosophical foundaons of this movement and understand its core ideas
in a meaningful way.
1. The Birthplace – Vienna Circle and the Scienc Spirit
Logical Posivism was born in the 1920s in Vienna, Austria, with a group of philosophers and
sciensts known as the Vienna Circle. They were deeply inspired by the success of modern
science and wanted to create a philosophy that was as precise, reliable, and logical as
physics or mathemacs.
Key gures included Moritz Schlick, Rudolf Carnap, Oo Neurath, and others. They admired
the work of sciensts like Einstein and logicians like Bertrand Russell and Ludwig
Wigenstein (especially his early work Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus).
They believed that philosophy should not deal with abstract ideas about reality, soul, or God
unless those ideas could be tested or logically proven.
2. Vericaon Principle – The Core Idea
The beang heart of Logical Posivism is the Vericaon Principle. Imagine someone tells
you, “There is a pink unicorn living in a parallel universe.” Logical Posivists would ask: Can
we test this? Can we observe or measure this unicorn in any way? If not, then this sentence
is meaningless to them.
According to the Vericaon Principle, a statement is meaningful only if:
• It can be veried by sense experience, or
• It is logically or mathemacally provable
So, statements like:
• “Water boils at 100°C” → meaningful (can be tested)
• “All bachelors are unmarried” → meaningful (logically true)
• “God exists” → meaningless (not veriable or provable)
This was a radical stance. Logical Posivists weren’t saying that religion or metaphysics was
wrong, but that such statements don’t have cognive meaning—they don’t add to our
factual knowledge.
3. An-Metaphysics – A War Against Abstract Philosophy
Metaphysics, tradionally, dealt with quesons like:
• What is the nature of being?
Easy2Siksha
• Is the universe nite or innite?
• What is the soul?
Logical Posivists rejected metaphysics as meaningless chaer. For them, philosophy had
wasted centuries on things that couldn’t be proven or disproven.
They wanted to eliminate metaphysics using scienc reasoning. Carnap even wrote a
famous essay called The Eliminaon of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language,
where he analyzed metaphysical sentences and showed they had no meaning according to
the vericaon principle.
4. The Role of Language and Logic
Logical Posivists believed that language is the key to understanding knowledge. Much of
tradional philosophy, they argued, was simply the result of misusing language.
For example, when someone says “The Absolute is Innite,” what does that mean? Can we
dene “Absolute”? Can we measure “Innite”? If not, then the statement might sound deep
but is logically empty.
So, they focused on creang logical languages, where every word had a clear meaning and
every sentence could be analyzed for truth or falsehood.
5. The Inuence of Empiricism and Science
Logical Posivism is deeply rooted in Empiricism—the idea that all knowledge comes from
experience. But unlike classical empiricists (like Locke or Hume), Logical Posivists combined
this with the precision of modern logic and mathemacs.
They wanted to:
• Analyze scienc statements logically
• Remove emoonal or subjecve interpretaons
• Create a unied science using a common scienc language
This approach strongly inuenced the way modern science and philosophy of science
developed in the 20th century.
6. Cricism and Decline
No story is complete without challenges. Logical Posivism, though powerful and aracve,
faced serious cricism.
Easy2Siksha
The biggest blow came from within: the Vericaon Principle itself couldn’t be veried.
Think about it—can we test or prove the vericaon principle using logic or experience? No.
So by its own rule, it's meaningless!
Other cricisms included:
• It was too strict and eliminated many meaningful ideas (like ethics, aesthecs,
emoons)
• Science itself uses theorecal concepts (like electrons or gravity) that are not directly
observable
• Language is more complex and exible than Logical Posivists assumed
Philosophers like Karl Popper, W.V.O. Quine, and Thomas Kuhn oered alternave views, and
by the 1960s, Logical Posivism began to decline.
7. Legacy and Importance
Even though Logical Posivism didn’t survive in its original form, its inuence remains huge.
It transformed philosophy by:
• Demanding clarity and precision in thought
• Encouraging logical analysis and skepcism
• Shaping the eld of philosophy of science
• Inspiring later movements like Analyc Philosophy
It also helped draw a clear line between science and pseudoscience, promong crical
thinking and scienc literacy.
Conclusion: A New Way of Thinking
Logical Posivism was like a ashlight in the dark room of philosophy. It tried to shine the
light of science and logic onto every corner of knowledge, throwing out anything that
couldn’t be tested or proved.
While the ashlight had its limitaons, it helped clear away much confusion and led
philosophers to ask beer quesons. It reminded us that not all grand-sounding statements
are meaningful—and that clarity, logic, and evidence are the cornerstones of real
knowledge.
In today’s world of misinformaon and vague claims, the spirit of Logical Posivism sll
teaches us to ask: Is this true? Can it be tested? What does it really mean?
“This paper has been carefully prepared for educaonal purposes. If you noce any mistakes or
have suggesons, feel free to share your feedback.”
