उपर्युक्त परिच्छेद के सन्दर्भ में, निम्नलिखित पूर्वधारणाएँ बनाई गई हैं :
- I.हथकरघा क्षेत्र में राज्य को किसी भी रूप में अंतर्ग्रस्त होने की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है ।
- II.तेज़ी से बदलते हुए आधुनिक विश्व में हथकरघा उत्पाद अब पसंदीदा और आकर्षक नहीं रह गए हैं ।
उपर्युक्त पूर्वधारणाओं में से कौन-सी वैध है/हैं ?
Read this question in English
With reference to the above passage, the following assumptions have been made:
I. There is no need for the State to be involved in any manner in the handloom sector.
II. Handloom products are no longer appealing and attractive in the rapidly changing modern world.
Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?
(a) I only · (b) II only · (c) Both I and II · (d) Neither I nor II
उत्तर और व्याख्या · explanation in English
Answer: (d) न तो I और न ही II
The passage criticises the narrative used to promote handloom, not State involvement or the products themselves. Both statements draw conclusions the author never makes.
- ✗ I The passage questions the basis on which the State supports handloom (tradition), not State support as such. 'No need … in any manner' is an extreme claim.
- ✗ II The passage explains that large sections ignore handloom because it is promoted as 'traditional' through a contested narrative, not because the products have lost their appeal in a changing world.
Remember · Separate the author's target (a narrative) from the thing described (the sector, its products); assumptions attacking the wrong target are invalid.
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper II (2025, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). ·