Social Science (087) — AI-generated practice question

Gandhi's claim makes sense because satyagraha required inner strength, not physical force. Avoiding violence is not weakness — it demands immense courage, self-discipline, and willingness to suffer without retaliation.

Gandhi explained that satyagraha is "pure soul-force," rooted in truth. A satyagrahi wins by appealing to the conscience of the oppressor, persuading people to see the truth rather than forcing them. This requires active, intense moral resistance — far harder than responding with violence.

Physical force, by contrast, requires no such discipline; anyone can use it. Hence, non-violent resistance belonged only to those with exceptional moral strength, making it the weapon of the strong, not the weak.

Source: Chapter 2, Section 1.1 – The Idea of Satyagraha

---

The examiner expects you to:

1. Distinguish between physical strength and moral/inner strength.
2. Use Gandhi's own language from Source A: "pure soul-force," "intense activity," not passive.
3. Explain the mechanism: conscience-appeal, not coercion.

Avoid confusing "non-violence = passivity." Gandhi explicitly rejected the term "passive resistance." The key contrast is: anyone can use violence, but bearing suffering without retaliation demands exceptional courage — hence it is a weapon of the strong.