Order 453512: comparison of ideologies of Bhagat singh and mahatma gandhi

Word-Count: 1000 words

I. Essays: Each student will be responsible for submitting one essay during the course. 

Length of essay: 1000 words

Due date: Thursday, July 20, at the end of the lecture. Late papers will be accepted with a late penalty. No late papers accepted.

II. Essay Questions:

The essay should have two parts: 500 word literature review, 500 word analysis using one of the methods below. Your analysis needs to include at least two cases within a country, or between countries. Cases can be from the same country or two different countries. Make the scope as specific as possible, due to the short length of the paper. Indicate the dependent and independent variables. Your research question should be on a major concept/issue discussed in class and should be framed in the form of a Why? question.

Approaching the Research Question

Sample question: Compare two of the following thinkers on whether violence should be used as an instrument in politics: Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Machiavelli, Gandhi or Bhagat Singh

1. Read the question carefully.

2. Make a list of what the question is asking you to do. For example, the question above is asking you to argue whether violence should be used as an instrument in politics through a comparative analysis of the ideas and politics of two thinkers.

3. Identify the key concepts. In this question, the key concepts are violence as a political instrument.

4. Identify the problem that is being set up in the question. In this example, the issue is a moral and ethical one in which you have to figure out whether the thinkers make a moral argument for the use of violence, its consequences and benefits etc.

5. Ask more questions.

6. Re-frame the general essay question in different ways to narrow down the scope of your research by breaking down the key concepts. With some quick research into your topic, you can make a stronger ,more focused research question to guide your writing. This will lead to more focused arguments, as opposed to the weaker argument of “Violence should be used as an instrument”.

7. Unclear question: Compare Bhagat Singh and Mahatama Gandhi on violence.

8. Clearer questions:

“Which political instruments did Bhagat Singh and Mahatama Gandhi use in their quest for national liberation and how did they justify their choices?”

“Which features of Gandhi and Bhagat Singh’s respective frameworks of ethics produce different answers on the use of violence in politics?

“According to Bhagat Singh and Mahatam Gandhi, which scenarios justify the use of violent and non-violent civil-disobedience?

9. Evaluate your research question

Is it clear?

Is it focused?

Is it critical/complex?

10. Set the scope for your research. The scope of an argument is the filed of –all that is relevant- to your argument. A strong argument’s scope is not too broad/general and not too specific. For example, if we wanted to make an argument on gender inequality in a democracy:

11. Too general: As seen in the cases of India, Pakistan, Canada and America, gender equality exists in democracy in the form of economic and social discrimination against women.

12. Problem: way too many case studies and economic/social discrimination is way too broad of a concept/issue to tackle in one paper. Instead, narrow down the number of case studies and focus on just one dimension/element/branch of the main concept of gender inequality.

13. Too specific: Gender inequality exists in Cairo in the case of mother’s not allowing daughters to go to school.

14. Problem: way too specific and the language is very unclear. What is implied and needs to be stated more clearly in this argument is that the right to education is a core dimension of the concept of gender inequality. What remains unclear is the strategic/analytical leverage of focusing on Cairo as a case study to explore this, which means more research is required to push this argument beyond its specificity. Another major issue is that this argument is a statement that “gender inequality exists”, it does not go beyond this and is thus, lacking an argumentative dimension.

Tool: Sartori’s Ladder of Abstraction

The idea that we can organize concepts on the basis of their specificity/generality.The higher the concept is on the ladder, the more general/abstract it is. The lower it is on the ladder, the more specific it is. The trick to a strong argument is finding a balance, not too hot, not too cold, just enough information as your argument needs.

Tool: 3 Units of Analysis

One way to narrow down the scope of your argument to engage with a concept/issue in a more clearer and focused way is choosing a unit of analysis to frame your argument. In social sciences, there are three different units/levels of analysis: the individual, global/international and state/society. Use these frames to narrow down the scope of a research question or argument at the beginning of your paper.

Example: How did Martin Luther King’s politics of non-violence influence the civil rights movement?

Example: Did Martin Luther King’s politics of non-violence in the civil rights movement instigate institutional change at the level of the state?

Example: Compare and contrast the historical and social contexts in which Gandhi and Martin Luther King articulated their respective politics of non-violence. How did their respective contexts shape their approach to national liberation?

Create a hypothesis to begin the research hunt. What do you think you will end up arguing? Which personal biases will affect your argumentation?           

Grading Secrets

Instructors always check to see if student has answered –ALL- sections of the research question.

Instructors deduct marks if the scope/frame of analysis is too broad/general.

Instructors deduct marks if the argument is weak and does not go beyond the “should” dimension of the question. By refining the scope, you can go deeper into the concept/context to avoid the general argument of “violence should be used in politics”.

Instructors always look for whether the student has answered –ALL- sections of the research question.

Research Process

For a research paper in the social sciences, your argument should be grounded in at least 3 scholarly academic journals or books. Papers with a weak theoretical grounding from texts/research often have weaker unqualified arguments, broad scopes and lack of focus. Instead of locating 3 random sources for the sake of meeting this minimum, be more strategic with which sources you use and how you use them to setup and qualify your argument. The following is a step-by-step process in how to conduct research for a social sciences paper.

Do not aimlessly read. Keep in mind that a social sciences research paper requires you to perform three steps in critical thinking. With this in mind, find sources that are rich in information and will support you in accomplishing these tasks.

Set-up the problem through a literature review/summary of key concepts

1. Critically engage with the concept by applying it to a case, other studies, or alternative theoretical frameworks

2. Provide new language for articulating the problem and its solutions. When we apply a concept to a case study, a new theoretical framework, how we set up the problem and framed the concept originally is challenged or affirmed. Either way, how we understand the concept is expanded and your application gives us new ways of looking at the problem or thinking of solutions.

3. Finding sources. The amount of sources you should use depends on how long the essay will be. A paper 3-5 pages should have at least 3 books or academic/scholarly journal articles, whereas a longer 8 page paper should have at least 5-6.

4. In social sciences, whenever possible consult primary sources, original documents, such as essays, speeches, letters, diaries, creative works, interviews, books by the central theorist such as Gandhi, Machiavelli, Fanon etc. to explain main concepts.

5. In social sciences, the heart of your argument and critical analysis is in your interpretation of the concepts and problem.

6. Use secondary sources such as scholarly journal articles, publications on the theorist’s concepts, reviews, encyclopedias etc. to provide historical context, critique or further explanation of the theorist’s concept. If the essay question does not focus on a theorist, then use secondary sources to build a literature review of the main concepts. Secondary sources are also helpful for bringing in alternative theoretical frameworks to critique the concept.

7. Read. Cite. Transcribe. Paraphrase. Write.

8. Once you have found your sources, read them as closely or as briefly as needed to qualify your argument. One way to save time is to annotate and collect quotes and page numbers as you read.

9. As you collect sources, generate citations through the library portal by adding the source to your folder and then exporting data as brief citations.

10. Create a short transcription of notes on each reading explaining main argument/approach. Paraphrase jot notes into your own words in the form of paragraphs. This will come in handy when creating your literature review in your essay.

11. Once you have an extensive summary of the readings and concepts, add your own critical analysis of each source. For every quote you use or reference, you have to provide a few sentences of analysis/interpretation. Once you weave in critical analysis, re-arrange summaries into a very line of reasoning to show the development of the concept in your paper.

12. Now you have a very rough first draft! Time to organize, re-structure and build an argument!

13. Moving Beyond the 5 paragraph Essay

14. In the Social Sciences/Humanities, in an essay you are expected to critically engage with concepts and theoretical frameworks through interpretative and empirical analysis. Analyzing real-life case studies of policies, institutions etc. are one method of empirical analysis. Studying how the text of stories, narratives and primary sources is structured, expressed etc. is one method of interpretative analysis called discourse and content analysis. In this section, you will learn a simple 3-step guide to building a strong line of reasoning and some basic methods in social science research.

3 Stages of a Line of Reasoning

Step I: Deconstruction

1. Deconstruct/unpack major concepts you will be engaging in your paper. For example, violence, political ethics, freedom, sovereignty, etc. This is also the place to provide context, qualify your argument or illustrate a gap in the literature on such concepts. This is where you set up the problem you will address in your essay.

2. Try to rely on PARAPHRASING, not direct quotes.

3. Do not use oxford dictionary or encyclopedias for definitions. Provide interpretations of primary and secondary sources to present your own literature review of the problem/concept.

4. This should be 1/3 of your paper.

5. Note: A comparative analysis paper may require to organize your paper in a different way. The two main ways to structure a comparative analysis are:

Step II: Re-Construction

6. Having given a general interpretation of your main concepts or the problem above, in this section choose a specific dimension of the concept to focus on and explore whether challenging it through application changes how we understand the entire concept.

7. This is where you –apply- your knowledge/definitions etc. You can use a case study, real life examples, counter-points etc. The point is to expand the original definition, look at it more critically.

8. Some methods include case analysis, discourse analysis, comparative analysis.

9. See how the original concepts you introduced change, move, grow, as you add in more literature/alternative approaches etc.

10. This should be 1/3 of your paper

Step III: Synthesis

11. This is the A+ area of the paper, where your voice and contributions sit.  Synthesize all of the work you just did above, to answer the question “So What?” What was the point of all the research you just did, why should we care if Bhagat Singh’s definition of violence is unethical or that Gandhi’s prescription of non-violence is not practical in the context of national liberation.

12. Show how your theoretical contributions add to the conversation, how we see the concept, our understanding of the problem.

13. This should be 1/3 of your paper.

Methods: Content Analysis

1. Content analysis is a simple research method in social sciences for analyzing texts and any written forms of communication. You can use it to analyze everything from speeches, to books, to essays, to newspaper articles.

2. Write down a preliminary research question to guide your reading. Make sure it identifies the issue, the texts you will be analyzing and the key words you will be looking for. For example, “Was news coverage of the Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump debate gendered?”. The issue is how media outlets covered the debate and the texts that will be analyzed are newspaper articles, and the key words you will be looking for will depend on how you define/operationalize the concept “gendered” such as highlighting comments on Hillary Clinton’s hair, age, style etc.

3. Select a few samples of texts to analyze based on your question and make sure to select samples that reflect the time-sensitivity and context of the research question. For example, choose newspaper articles from the Trump-Clinton presidential campaign, not from other time periods/contexts of elections, choose news articles in the USA, choose news articles from a diverse set of newspaper organizations to avoid a biased sample etc.

4. Briefly read the samples and make a quick note on what each is generally arguing.

5. Make a code/list of units of analysis (specific words, phrases, themes) you will be looking for to track. For example, you can create a system of categories/themes to measure the concept of gender such as comments on physical appearance/beauty, comments on competency etc.

6. Mark up/annotate the text with this code, use pens, highlighters, sticky notes etc. and mark each moment in the text when these categories are mentioned. Keep a calculation of how many times each category is brought up in the text to study the data later.

7. Interpret and report your findings. You can offer a qualitative analysis or use the calculations for a more quantitative analysis.

Method: Discourse/Textual Analysis

Another name for this method is, close reading. There are many ways to do a discourse analysis, this is the simplest way to incorporate it as a method into any social sciences course. A discourse is how we make sense of the form and content of a text and the many layers of meaning that are embedded in the text itself. The purpose of this method is to reveal the frames that give meaning to a text to explore the different ways knowledge is produced.

1. Choose a text to analyze, it can be a written text, a painting, the choreography of a dance, an interview, a speech, a story/narrative etc.

2. Do research on the historical, cultural and social context of the text. For example, lets use the text, Hind Swaraj, written by Gandhi in the form of a conversation between a newspaper editor and a reader. The form of the text seems like a play, but it is actually a political document through which Gandhi expressed his views on national liberation to the everyday Indian in simpler language. He wrote it as a response to the colonial occupation of India by the British Empire. It is also the primary source in which he introduces his ideas on non-violence.

3. Do research on the source and medium of the text. What are the political/private orientations of those who published it? Who is the target audience? Which institutions played a role in producing it? What is the medium (radio, newspaper, social media etc.) used to communicate the message?What kind of format is it—for example, in a newspaper, there can be many article formats such as op-ed, editorial, news report etc.

4. Mark up/annotate the text using a coding system. For example, highlighting everywhere Gandhi discusses non-violence and circling everywhere he discusses freedom in Hind Swaraj. A quick way to do this in a digital document is CTRL + F(ind) or searching for keywords. One thing to include in your coding system is a mark for all intertextual references in the text. Intertextual references are when the text refers to other books, other events, other theorists in the line of reasoning. This will provide critical insight into how the historical and cultural context in which the text was written/produced has shaped the intentions of the author and the text’s meaning.

5. Structure of the text: what can we learn about the argument from how the author has organized the text? Look closely at which topics are discussed more than others, which headings are used, how words are translated, which information the author includes or excludes etc. What role does each part of the text play in furthering/developing the argument.For example, does Gandhi’s discussion of non-violence in chapter 1 contradict his discussion of non-violence in chapter 3? Look for contradictions, echoes, any clues in the rhetoric of the text that may reveal another a layer of the text’s meaning. This is a good exercise for mapping the text’s line of reasoning and whether it is sound and valid.

6. Collate/collect all comments in the text that mention your category of analysis, (non)violence in our example, and put them all in one document. This is called a discourse strand. You can now analyze how a theme is developed in the text.

7. Interpret the data. Build a story from your findings. How do your findings on the form/content of the text affect the meaning of the concepts in the text?

Method: Comparative Analysis

A comparative analysis is a method for making an argument on how two or more things are the same or different, and why. You can compare texts, theoretical frameworks, processes, narratives etc. There are many ways to organize and conduct a comparative analysis, choose the approach that best fits your research question and scope. For this, we will work with the sample question above and choose the politics of Bhagat Singh and Mahatama Ghandi.

1. Choose the cases you want to compare (Singh/Gandhi). Set a frame of reference to avoid making a general/empty argument. There are many ways to compare Singh/Gandhi (religious views, political orientations etc.) In our case, the frame of reference is: the use of violence as an instrument in the Indian national liberation movement. A frame of reference can be a question, a theme, a concept, a historical time-frame etc.

2. A comparative analysis requires you to make an argument. Listing differences and similarities in paragraphs is not an argument. You have to make an argument on what about the context or the specific cases produces the similarities/differences. For example, the reason Bhagat Singh and Gandhi have opposing views on the use of violence is because they have different frameworks of ethics due to their respective definitions of freedom. Your paper would ground the list of similarities/differences in a deeper argument on how Gandhi and Bhagat Singh understand freedom in the context of national liberation.

3. Make sure your analysis of both cases, of Bhagat Singh and Gandhi is equal and weighted. Often times, students lose grades for focusing too much on one side and leave the other side underdeveloped, making the argument much weaker.

4. Two ways to structure a comparative analysis:

5. Text by Text: introduction-all things Gandhi-all things Bhagat Singh-analysis-conclusion

6. Point by Point: introduction-point 1 G/B, point 2 G/B, point 3 G/B-conclusion

7. The thesis statement must illustrate how the two cases relate to one another. Ask yourself are they in debate? In contradiction? In the same conversation? Etc. The following is an example of an strong thesis statement that illustrates the frame of reference, the underlying point that explains the similarities/differences and the method.

8. Through a comparative analysis, I will argue that though both Gandhi and Bhagat Singh present civil disobedience as a method of national liberation, their respective understanding of freedom, result in differing views on the permissibility of violence as a means in politics. In particular, Bhagat Singh’s grounds his ideology in freedom as freedom from the fear of death, and Gandhi grounds his ideology in freedom as freedom through soul-force.

Building a Strong Thesis Statement

1. The thesis statement is the road map, a blueprint of your argument. It should be placed at the end of the introduction. A good thesis statement should do two things:1) tell the reader what you will be arguing and 2)showing the reader how you will be making your argument. The thesis statement should provide insight into how your line of reasoning will develop, the method you will use and what your argument will be. Use sign-posts thesis statement should be woven into each paragraph of the paper. The following are some tips to build a strong thesis statement and increase the internal consistency of your argument.

2. Example: “Through a comparative analysis of  the political thought of Bhagat Singh and Gandhi, I will argue against the use of violence as a political instrument. Working off of Gandhi’s configuration of the means-end relationship, I argue that Bhagat Singh’s approach not only leaves little space for political ethics, but also, does not account for the liberation of the community beyond the freedom fighter’s act of violence.

3. “In this paper I will argue, _________”, use sign posts and transitional sentences throughout your paper to refer back to your thesis and show how your argument is developing. Each transitional sentence should connect to the paragraph before and indicate where in the line of reasoning you are.

4. Definitions and questions are not thesis statements: “sovereignty is state has the monopoly over force” “what is sovereignty?” “bhagat singh believes in violence as a tool for politics”