https://www.orfonline.org/research/india-china-disengagement-progress-on-the-ground-doubts-in-the-air
India-China disengagement: Progress on the ground, doubts in the air

https://www.orfonline.org/research/5-geopolitical-questions-for-2025
5 geopolitical questions for 2025

https://www.orfonline.org/research/an-indo-european-realignment
An Indo-European realignment

https://www.orfonline.org/research/decoding-africa-s-interest-in-brics
Decoding Africa’s interest in BRICS

https://www.orfonline.org/research/u-s-indo-pacific-strategy-north-eastern-dialogues
U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy: North-Eastern Dialogues

सत्-सामान्यांची किंवा सद्‌-रूपांची उपपत्ती सिद्धांत (Theory of Ideas किंवा Forms) यूपीएससी मुख्य,2024

✍ प्लेटोचा सत्-सामान्यांची किंवा सद्‌-रूपांची उपपत्ती सिद्धांत (Theory of Forms) हे तत्त्वज्ञानातील सर्वात महत्त्वाचे तत्त्व आहे. प्लेटोच्या मते, भौतिक जग हे अपूर्ण आणि अस्थिर आहे, तर "रूप" किंवा "फॉर्म" हे स्थायी आणि शाश्वत आहेत. त्यांचे अस्तित्व हे भौतिक वस्तूंवर अवलंबून नाही. प्लेटोच्या मते, प्रत्येक भौतिक वस्तू किंवा संकल्पना एका परिपूर्ण रूपाची प्रतिकृती आहे, जसे की न्याय, सौंदर्य, सत्य इत्यादी. या रूपांमध्ये सगळ्यात उच्च "कल्याण" (Form of the Good) आहे, ज्याचा उद्देश प्रत्येक व्यक्तीने प्राप्त करणे असते.

✍ प्लेटोचे रूपांच्या सिद्धांताला तर्कवाद (Rationalism) आणि आदर्शवाद (Idealism) या विचारधारांचा पाया मानला जातो. प्लेटोच्या राज्याच्या आदर्श रूपात, तत्त्वज्ञ-राजा हा "कल्याण" च्या पूर्ण ज्ञानाच्या आधारे शासन करतो. प्लेटोचे आदर्श राज्य हे वर्गीय विभागणीवर आधारित आहे, जिथे प्रत्येक व्यक्तीची जबाबदारी त्याच्या "रूप" नुसार ठरवली जाते. तत्त्वज्ञांनी शासन करावे, कारण तेच सत्य आणि कल्याणाचे पूर्ण ज्ञान धारण करतात.

✍ प्लेटोच्या सिद्धांताची भलावण ॲरिस्टॉटल याने केली आहे. त्याच्या मते, रूप आणि वस्तू हे वेगळे नाहीत, तर वस्तूंमध्येच रूपांचे अस्तित्व असते. याशिवाय, प्लेटोचे आदर्श राज्य हे व्यवहार्य नाही, कारण मानवांच्या स्वाभाविक गुणधर्मांमध्ये असमानता असते, आणि राज्य हे सर्वसामान्य लोकांच्या स्वातंत्र्यावर आधारित असावे.

✍आधुनिक संदर्भात, प्लेटोचा सद्-रूपात्मक सिद्धांत राजकीय आदर्शवाद (Political Idealism) आणि कल्पनारम्य वा भावनामय(यूटोपियन) विचारसरणी मध्ये महत्त्वपूर्ण ठरतात. तत्त्वज्ञ-राजाची संकल्पना काही प्रमाणात आधुनिक तंत्रज्ञ शासकां (Technocrats) मध्ये दिसून येते, जिथे तज्ज्ञ ज्ञानावर आधारित शासन केले जाते.

✍तसेच, प्लेटोचा ज्ञानावर आधारित राज्य (Epistocracy) हा विचार सध्याच्या तंत्रज्ञानाच्या युगात, विशेषतः AI आणि डेटा शासित नितीमत्तेत (AI and Data-Driven Governance) उपयुक्त ठरू शकतो.

Plato's theory of Forms. UPSC Mains 2024, 15 marks

🌿 Plato's Theory of Forms is a central tenet of his metaphysical and epistemological thought, positing that non-material abstract forms, or ideas, represent the highest and most fundamental kind of reality, rather than the empirical world experienced through senses. In his dialogue "Republic," Plato suggests that the empirical world is a mere shadow or imperfect reflection of the true reality, which consists of unchanging, eternal Forms.

✍ At the heart of the theory lies the distinction between the world of appearances and the world of Forms. The Forms, such as justice, beauty, and equality, are perfect and immutable, while their manifestations in the empirical world are transient and flawed. For instance, Plato's famous Allegory of the Cave symbolizes the philosopher’s journey from ignorance (the cave) to enlightenment (the world of Forms), emphasizing that true knowledge (episteme) can only be gained through intellectual reasoning, not through sensory experience.

✍Critically, scholars like Aristotle argue that Plato’s separation of Forms from material objects creates an unnecessary dualism, leading to a metaphysical gap between the real world and abstract concepts. Aristotle’s doctrine of immanence suggests that universals (akin to Forms) exist within objects themselves, not in a separate realm.

✍ Moreover, Karl Popper criticizes Plato's idealism as a precursor to totalitarian thought. Popper, in "The Open Society and Its Enemies," contends that Plato’s emphasis on philosopher-kings, who possess knowledge of the Forms, creates an elitist hierarchy, potentially justifying authoritarian rule.

✍In contemporary political thought, Plato’s theory has been critiqued for its idealism and its detachment from empirical political realities. However, its emphasis on the pursuit of universal justice and objective truth continues to influence normative political theories, particularly those concerned with the ethical foundations of governance. Thus, while Plato’s theory offers valuable insights into the nature of knowledge and justice, its practical application remains contested.

Interpretive Approach to the comparative politics, CSE Mains 2024, 10 marks

The interpretive approach to the study of comparative politics emphasizes understanding the meaning and context behind political actions, institutions, and behaviors. Rooted in hermeneutics and phenomenology, this approach is distinct from positivist traditions that focus on empirical regularities. Interpretivists argue that political realities are socially constructed and shaped by historical, cultural, and ideational factors.

Key Scholars:
-Max Weber: Weber's notion of Verstehen (understanding) is central to the interpretive approach. He suggested that political actions must be understood from the viewpoint of the actors involved, acknowledging their subjective motivations and cultural contexts.
-Clifford Geertz: Geertz’s work on thick description in anthropology has been applied to political science, focusing on the deep analysis of political symbols, meanings, and rituals within specific cultures.
- Charles Taylor: Taylor’s focus on social imaginaries illustrates how collective meanings shape political life, emphasizing the role of ideas and identity in shaping political structures.

Key Features:
1. Focus on Meaning: Unlike positivism, which seeks to establish causal relationships, interpretivism explores the meanings and values that underlie political actions. For example, studying nationalism involves understanding how different communities perceive their identity and political legitimacy.
2. Contextual Understanding: Interpretive scholars focus on the historical and cultural contexts that influence political institutions. For example, studying democracy in India requires understanding the
caste system, colonial history, and religious diversity.
3. Qualitative Methods: This approach uses qualitative methods such as case studies, ethnography, and discourse analysis to delve into political meanings and ideologies.

Examples:
- In examining authoritarian regimes, interpretivists may focus on how the symbols of power (e.g., military uniforms, national flags) are used to maintain legitimacy.
- The study of populism involves understanding how political leaders construct narratives around the "people" vs. the "elite," exploring the symbolic and ideological dimensions of populist rhetoric.

Critique:
While the interpretive approach offers a rich understanding of political life, critics argue that it often lacks the generalizability and empirical rigor of more positivist approaches. Furthermore, its reliance on subjective interpretations can lead to bias in analysis.

The interpretive approach in comparative politics contributes significantly to the understanding of complex political phenomena by focusing on meanings, identities, and ideational factors. However, it must be supplemented with empirical approaches for a more balanced analysis.

राज्याचा बहुलतावादी सिध्दांत. यूपीएससी मुख्य 2024, 10 गुण

राज्याचा बहुलतावादी सिद्धांत (Pluralist Theory of State) हा राज्याची संकल्पना विविध गटांमध्ये सत्ता वितरणावर आधारित असल्याचे मानतो. या सिद्धांतानुसार, सत्ता एकाच गटाच्या हातात नसून विविध सामाजिक, आर्थिक, सांस्कृतिक गटांमध्ये विभागली जाते. विविध गट आणि संघटना सरकारच्या धोरणांवर परिणाम घडवून आणतात. यामध्ये संघटना, व्यावसायिक गट, धर्म, व्यापार यांचा समावेश होतो.

बहुलतावादी राज्य सिद्धांतावर अनेक विचारवंतांनी चर्चा केली आहे. रॉबर्ट डॅहल (Robert Dahl) याने राज्यामध्ये विविध गटांचा सत्ता कसा परिणाम करतो याचे विश्लेषण केले आहे. त्याने ‘पॉलीआर्की’ (Polyarchy) या संकल्पनेद्वारे नमूद केले की, लोकशाही व्यवस्थेत एकाच गटाचे प्रभुत्व नसून, विविध गट एकमेकांवर प्रभाव टाकतात. याचप्रमाणे डेव्हिड ट्रूमॅन (David Truman) यांनी गटांच्या हितसंबंधांच्या राजकारणावर लक्ष केंद्रित केले.

उदाहरणार्थ, भारतीय लोकशाहीमध्ये विविध धर्म, जात, आर्थिक गट आपापल्या हितांसाठी सरकारवर दबाव आणतात. या गटांच्या हितसंबंधांमुळे शासनाचा स्वरूप आणि धोरणे ठरतात.

शेवटी, बहुलतावादी राज्य सिद्धांत लोकशाही प्रक्रियेत विविधता आणि गटांचे महत्त्व अधोरेखित करतो. हा सिद्धांत लोकशाहीचे एक गुंतागुंतीचे स्वरूप दाखवतो, जिथे एकाधिकार नाही तर सामूहिक प्रभाव असतो.

Pluralist theory of state. CSE 2024, 10 Marks.

Pluralist Theory of State posits that political power is dispersed across various interest groups, rather than being concentrated in the hands of a ruling elite or a single entity. According to pluralists, the state functions as an arena where these diverse groups compete for influence and policy outcomes. It represents a neutral entity, responding to the balance of power among competing groups.

Robert Dahl, a leading pluralist, argues that modern democracies are "polyarchies," where power is widely distributed among multiple groups, preventing domination by any single entity. David Truman emphasized that interest groups play a key role in representing diverse societal interests, ensuring the state’s responsiveness to different segments of society.

In practice, pluralism is evident in liberal democracies where business groups, labor unions, environmental advocates, and others vie for influence through lobbying and political activism. For example, the environmental movement’s influence on climate policy showcases pluralist dynamics.

However, critics, like C. Wright Mills and Marxists, argue that power is still concentrated among elites, with the state serving their interests.

Pluralist theory views the state as a mediator of competing interests, promoting democracy and protecting minority voices. Its emphasis on diversity and decentralization remains a vital concept in understanding the complexities of modern governance.