JGU Id. No.

__21012322

O.P. Jindal Global University

Jindal Global Law School
End-term Examination – Semester A (Set A)

Course Name : Foundations of Social Sciences I_

Course Code : L-CB-0011

Programme : BBA.LL.B.

Session : 2021-2022

Time Allowed : 24 hours

Maximum Marks : 50
Answer to question no 1:

Common sense, if we interpret this word by word, common is present commonly and sense is
a feeling, sensation, or instinct we have. So what I believe is that common-sense in general
term is the power acquired by us automatically through which we can interpret a situation
and respond to it quickly without analyzing everything or simply saying it is the instincts that
we develop over time from our experience which help us to judge and react to a given
situation. In addition to Merriam Webster's definition of "sound and wise judgment" (based
on a simple assessment of the situation or facts), other researchers and dictionaries have
characterized this basic knowledge as "the capacity of self-evident truths" (Thomas Paine).

Though the name is common-sense but the saying holds true that "common-sense (accurate)
is not so common". Common sense is related somewhat to the general wisdom one holds in
society. That is the amount of common sense a person has regarding a specific society is the
degree of measure of how wise he is. It's amusing and doubly ironic that sociology, of all
things, is sometimes mistaken for common sense. The first irony in this equation is that it
implies that common sense is easy and obvious, which is not true. This is a big mistake
because common sense is a very important and powerful thing. In ironically common
language, the phrase usually refers to knowledge or skills that people learn on their own,
without being taught. When we live in the social world, we learn everything we know from
our peers. However, sometimes society also removes the signs of what we've learned.
Sociologists call this kind of social knowledge "common sense." This is the kind of
knowledge that we are taught not to learn. Common sense is a very important social
institution because it is the glue that holds the social structure together. It stands for a whole
range of values, attitudes, and habits of thought that we all share and that we use to make
sense of our world.

When we talk about common sense, we're talking about it in the strictest sense. It's already in
place and working hard before we even think about making a decision. A lot of the social
world is taken for granted and sinks like an iceberg beneath the surface of our minds, leaving
only a small part of it for us to pay attention to. Social life would be impossible if we and the
people we meet didn't have the same ideas about the world. Because of its implications in
ordinary language, it is easy to forget that common sense is not just a fancy phrase for the
simple-minded naiveties of other people. To live in society, one may argue, is to live in
common sense When it comes to dominating society, common sense plays an important role;
nevertheless, there is a substantial amount of popular common sense that is influenced by
power. The mutually beneficial relationships between power and common sense are not
inherent nor permanent, but rather context-driven.

What I infer is that common sense are the learnings that we learn passively or are considered
to be learned passively which form the structure of the society. These are the learning we are
supposed to know by ourselves as we grow up and take a subconscious place in our mind
through which they are supposed to affect our decision making especially for the ones which
do not include active thinking. To put it another way, common sense is the sum total of all of
our unchecked assumptions and views.
Answer to question no 12:

Rome was not built in a day, and neither was the institution of systematic oppression under
the guise of the caste system. These stiff institutions are like sturdy walls that will not
collapse in the first hit but will ultimately fall, and when it does, every blow will have its
contribution. What I've learned and concluded from the documentary is that success does not
strike overnight and never will. Similarly, the fight for equality will not be won overnight
but will need consistent efforts. These efforts must be made by everyone, not just the Dalits.
The day society realizes that caste disparity is not only a problem for the Dalits, but a
problem for society as a whole is the day we will begin to embrace the issue.

According to the documentary, the magnitude and pervasiveness of the caste system, caste
inequality, and caste-based discrimination are so great that institutional transformation of the
society is necessary rather than a movement. And, unfortunately, the institution that has to be
reformed is our society's governing institution, so what we need is a fundamental
restructuring of society that leads to huge social reforms that rectify the governing principles.
There is an easier solution that Dalits have embraced under the supervision of DR. B. R.
Ambedkar, which is a mass religious conversion into Buddhism, in which people adopt a
religion with institutions that provide them with equality.

The documentary film Jai Bhim Comrade documents many facets of the Ramabai colony
killings and the Khairlanji massacre. It depicts things such as the circumstances surrounding
the occurrence, the administration of justice, the state of the victim's family, and so on. It also
portrays connected topics such as Maharashtra's current Dalit movements, political activity,
and caste-based occurrences. It demonstrates how systemic oppression based on caste is so
pervasive across society that fighting it at so many levels becomes exhausting and justice
remains elusive.

Due to the police's disproportionate use of force in the Ramabai colony incident, ten Dalits
were shot dead. Many of those hurt were just onlookers who were not participating in any
kind of demonstration. The police erroneously claimed that the shooting was carried out to
prevent the igniting of an LPG truck. However, no harsh action was taken against the police
until the elections. Even after that, the police officer charged was not imprisoned, but was
instead admitted to a hospital and then released on bail. Furthermore, not enough aid was
offered to the victims' families. A similar situation occurred during the Khairlanji massacre,
in which a Dalit family was assaulted, raped, and beaten to death. Furthermore, owing to
systemic oppression based on caste, the investigations were not adequately conducted. Even
though the corpses were discovered nude, they were not examined for rape. And we can
plainly see in the documentary the police officer pointing out that the whole mismanagement
of the investigation was based on money (which relates to caste both directly and indirectly)
but was an incomplete statement as it was also biased of caste.

Even after years of organized resistance to all of these caste-based discriminations and all of
the measures put in place, there is still a lack of action. There has been organized resistance
in numerous forms, including music. One such organization is the Kabir Kala Manch, which
employs song and dance to make its message more prominent. Despite their efforts, these
organizations are retaliated against on the pretext of being violent, forcing them to go
underground. The main issue cannot be handled without the involvement of the other half or
influential individuals who just interfere to grab votes and then disappear to play their game
of politics. DR. B.R. Ambedkar correctly said in his iconic speech that just creating
provisions in the constitution would not result from inequality, but that it is up to us, the
people, to put them into action, or the constitution will be demolished first by my people.
Answer to question no 11

Principles for equality of opportunity are:

Careers open to talents

According to this notion, top public posts should be available to anybody, not only the
aristocracy, when it was first proposed during the French Revolution. When it comes to
employment and educational opportunities, merit should be the only consideration. Despite
its widespread proclamation, it's still assumed that it only applies in the public sector.

Fair equal opportunity

This concept is known by a variety of different names. From the realization that 'careers open
to skills' still benefits those with well-off parents. These individuals have a higher likelihood
of honing their skills than others with similar starting points. To achieve 'fair equitable
opportunity,' it is necessary to treat all individuals equally, regardless of their talents or
desires, from the outset.

Affirmative action

Women and people of color are among the groups targeted by this kind of activism, which is
also known as positive action. Even in its most basic form, the meritocracy still requires
businesses and bureaucrats to fill employment and educational positions. As a result, they're
obliged to do all they can to encourage women and minorities to apply to the positions
they're applying for. Growing up, women and people of color suffer particular disadvantages
because of the difficulties they confront and the lack of support and encouragement they get.
As a result, later on, giving them some particular care will only serve to restore the
equilibrium.

Reverse discrimination

The policy of reverse discrimination mandates employers and schools to provide positive
preference to women and minority groups. It is possible that just stating that one does not
discriminate may not be enough to guarantee that women and people of color get the
education and employment opportunities they are entitled to. Affirmative action may also be
exceedingly sluggish, and its use of objectives has a propensity, in reality, to favor reverse
discrimination anyhow. Proponents of reverse discrimination also highlight the need for 'role
models' in high-status positions, and say that they can only be assured via reverse
discrimination in the first generation. Another argument is that more women and black
people in positions of power and prominence improve the self-esteem of other members of
these groups, as well as the overall well-being of society.

Proportional equal opportunity

A proportional equal opportunity is a form of quota system which emphasizes that the
proportions of women and black people in each kind of work or school should match the
percentage of women and black people in society as a whole. Because women and men and
black and white individuals are on average just as well-off, this assumption may be derived
from the fact that this is the most logical explanation of what racial equality and sexual
equality are. Queries are the only practical solution since it is difficult to show prejudice in
reality and there is so much reluctance to change.

Equality of opportunity is an inadequate idea of equality because these five typical versions
of equality of opportunity take it for granted that there is a system of employment and kinds
of education which differ in salary and prospects, and that more people seek the excellent
ones than can have them. Individuals from wealthy origins, those with the greatest natural
skills, or those who represent an equally diverse group of outstanding men and women of all
races and ethnicities all end up at the top. Who benefits from disparities is determined by the
decision between the two, but the inequalities themselves are not altered as a result of the
choice. When it comes to inequality, it's the notion of equal opportunity that helps to make it
seem logical and acceptable. Rather than focusing on the merits of disparities in money,
power, prestige, and education, they place the focus on how these inequalities should be
distributed. The conclusion is that advantage itself is unassailable as long as the fight for
advantage is fair. The community may be shattered by a system of equal opportunity in its
normal form. It encourages individuals to focus on their futures.
Answer to question no 9

Interestingly, sociologists' interest in studying the structure of social inequality has decreased
at the same time as its magnitude has risen. This is due to several factors, some of which may
not be difficult to identify: the fall of Marxism as an intellectual (and political) enterprise; the
well-known issues with class theory; the development of new types of social movements; and
the "cultural turn" in all its incarnations. Some sociologists have not 'given up on social
inequality, but have instead re-tooled their intellectual arsenal to produce a new battery of
notions that may provide a fresh understanding of 'durable inequality.' Charles Tilly's work is
one example of this.

He is interested in "categorical disparities" — that is, inequalities across groups of persons

characterized by rather rigorous social discriminators. "Durable inequality relies largely on
the institutionalization of categorical pairings". Relevant social characteristics include
gender, ethnicity, immigration status, or rural-urban backgrounds. Not all categorical
differences among individuals result in economic or political inequalities between the
resultant groupings — for example, "excellent sense of humor/bad sense of humor" doesn't
seem to result in income disparities among the hilarious and the humorless. But the male-
female salary difference, the black-white wealth divide, and the White-Latino schooling gap
are instances of disparities that flow from and are likely driven by, the categorical position
enjoyed by the two groups. Categorical disparities are especially relevant since they seem to
be entirely unjustifiable. The fact that "skilled/unskilled" people have divergent wages is not
unexpected on grounds of productivity and value-added labor, but the fact that equally highly
educated women and men have differential incomes is certainly startling. The social
processes that Tilly views as being principally responsible for inequality across social
categories are exploitation and opportunity hoarding

The goal of Tilly's argument is to refute the concept that inequality can be described
gradationally, such as economists often understand it in terms of income curves with no
sudden social disparities. It is the categorical character of social disparity that is the focus of
his attention. People construct 'categorical pairings' by drawing boundaries between
themselves and 'others'. This is what Tilly refers to as 'permanent inequality' as a result of
these categories becoming institutionalized and ingrained. Tilly examines typical matched
and unequal categories such as male/female, black/white, and citizen/noncitizen, and claims
that the fundamental causes of these and comparable disparities are very similar. This
explanation is one of process, as opposed to recent studies that explain inequality case by
case. Categorical differences emerge because they provide a solution to urgent organizational
difficulties, according to Tilly. Whatever the "organization" is—as small as a family or as big
as a government—inequality continues because parties on both sides of the categorical split
grow to rely on that solution, despite its flaws. Tilly explains how these persistent inequities
are the result of four distinct mechanisms. The first of them, exploitation, is nearly
immediately taken from Marx and relates to the extraction of a surplus. As for "opportunity
hoarding," it might be argued that insiders are using Weber's concept of social closure to
protect their advantages. Emulation and adaptation, the next two steps, maybe the most
intriguing and novel. According to Tilly, social inequality spreads and becomes
institutionalized when exploitation and opportunity hoarding methods are replicated and
modified. Distinguishing between micro and macro structures, he demonstrates that
structural causes of long-term inequity may be traced back to specific institutional structures
that are subsequently replicated in different contexts. Infuriatingly, he prefers to offer simple,
clear instances rather than those that may be more informative because they are more
difficult to fit into his worldview. As a result, he looks at the dynamics of exploitation
between whites and blacks in South Africa under apartheid. I found Tilly's examination of
gender segregation in the United States extremely exciting.