Revision summary
Common sense is the everyday recipe knowledge of the life-world. It is the usual starting point for problems, not the method of proof. Advantages are relevance, hypotheses, and the language of respondents. Limitations are naturalised power, contradiction, and shallow cause. Durkheim, Mills, Schutz, and Garfinkel require a break after the start.
Model answer
Introduction
Common sense is the stock of everyday recipes by which people act and explain the world. Social research usually begins in that stock, because questions arise from puzzles in ordinary life. It cannot end there, because common sense is local, moral, and often wrong as explanation.
Body
Is it the starting point?
- Yes, as a starting point. Alfred Schutz described the life-world as the taken-for-granted base from which scientific questions are selected.
- C. Wright Mills asked for a sociological imagination that moves from personal trouble to public issue, which is a move that begins in common sense and does not stay there.
- Emile Durkheim insisted that common sense must be left behind as a method, even if the topic, such as suicide, is a public worry.
- So the fair answer is yes for the origin of problems, no for the method of proof.
Advantages
- It supplies relevance. People already know that dowry, queue-jumping, or factory shifts matter.
- It supplies first hypotheses and the language of respondents, without which interviews fail.
- It keeps the researcher from a closed jargon that cannot be checked against lived reports.
- Ethnomethodology, in Harold Garfinkel’s breaching experiments, used the smash of common sense as data about how order is done.
Limitations
- It naturalises power. Caste rank and gender duty appear as how things are.
- It is contradictory: thrift and display, fatalism and effort, live in the same proverb stock.
- It confuses correlation with cause and the typical with the universal.
- It is historically shallow. Mills’s distinction of biography and history is exactly what common sense skips.
- Value judgements arrive as facts: a crowd is a mob when the speaker dislikes it.
- Official common sense in files can be as misleading as folk common sense.
How research should use it
- Start with the puzzle. Convert it into variables, cases, and comparisons.
- Return findings to public language without putting the old error back in command.
- Feminist method is a warning: household common sense hid unpaid work as love.
Explanation in judgement
- Common sense is the usual door. Science is the reconstruction of what is found behind the door.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD CS[Common sense life-world] --> Q[Research question] Q --> M[Method comparison evidence] M --> F[Sociological finding] F --> P[Public language] CS --> N[Naturalised power] N --> M
Conclusion
Common sense is the starting point of social research as a source of problems and first meanings. Its advantages are relevance and access to the life-world. Its limitations are naturalised power, contradiction, and weak cause. Durkheim, Mills, Schutz, and Garfinkel together require that research begin there and then break with it as method.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
How is poverty a form of social exclusion? Illustrate in this connection the different dimensions of poverty and social exclusion
Next question in the 2023 paper (Q4). View answer →
-
Should sociologists ignore common sense?
No. They should start from it and then test it. Ignoring it loses the meanings of actors.
-
Is science just organised common sense?
No. Organisation includes comparison and the right to overturn the recipe.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2023 · Q1(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
How does the dramaturgical perspective enable our understanding of everyday life? -
2023 · Q1(d) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Is reference group theory a universally applicable model? Elucidate -
2023 · Q2(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
What, according to Robert Michels, is the iron law of oligarchy? Do lions folly and foxes in Vilfredo Pareto's theory, essentially differ from each other? Substantiate -
2023 · Q3(b) · Sociology GS 1 · 20 marks
How do you assess the changing patterns in kinship relations in societies today? -
2023 · Q4(c) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Highlight the differences and similarities between totemism and animism -
2023 · Q5(a) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Examine the relevance of corporate social responsibility in a world marked by increasing environmental crises -
2023 · Q5(d) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Analyze critically David Morgan's views on family practices -
2023 · Q5(e) · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Does women's education help to eradicate patriarchal discriminations? Reflect with illustrations
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2023 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
What is the distinctiveness of the feminist method of social research? Comment
Sociology as Science
Feminist method starts from women’s everyday work and treats gender as power, not as an extra variable. Smith, Harding, Oakley, and Collins made standpoint, reflexivity, and intersection the core tools. It criticises Durkheim-style distance that treated the male public actor as the normal subject. Indian care work, dowry, and the double day show what occupation surveys miss. The method stays empirical. It is not a substitute for evidence.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2023 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
Discuss the relationship between sociology and political science
Sociology as Science
Both disciplines study power. Political science centres the state. Sociology centres groups and everyday domination. Marx, Weber, Pareto, Michels, and Mills already joined class, party, and elite. Durkheim and Parsons treated the polity as part of a wider social system. Indian elections, Mandal, and civil society research fail if the two fields are sealed. The relation is complementary, not a hierarchy of sciences.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2023 · Sociology GS 1 · 10 marks
How does the dramaturgical perspective enable our understanding of everyday life?
Sociology
Goffman reads everyday life as performance with front and back regions, teams, and face-work. The point is the shared definition of the situation, not a claim that all talk is false. Mead’s Me is made public on this stage. Asylums shows what happens when the back region is removed. The method is strong on encounters and weak as a full theory of class and the state.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.