Statement and Arguments - Base Level
Practice and master this topic with our carefully crafted questions.
Study the following instructions carefully and then answer the questions that follow.
In making decisions about important questions it is desirable that a candidate is able to distinguish between 'strong' and 'weak' arguments so far as they relate to the questions.
'Weak' arguments may not be directly related to the questions and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question.
Each question below is followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.
Give Answer
(a) Only argument I is strong
(b) Only argument II is strong
(c) Either I or II is strong
(d) Neither I nor II is strong
(e) Both I and II are strong
Statement: Should India encourage exports, when most things are insufficient for internal use itself?
Arguments:
(I) Yes. We have to earn foreign exchange to pay for our imports.
(II) No. Even selective encouragement would lead to shortages.
Clearly, India can export only the surplus and that which can be saved after fulfilling its own needs, to pay for its imports. Encouragement to export cannot lead to shortages as it shall provide the resources for imports. So, only argument I holds.
Statement: Should new big industries be started in Mumbai ?
Arguments:
(I) Yes. It will create job opportunities.
(II) No. It will further add to the pollution of the city.
Opening up of new industries is advantageous in opening more employment avenues, and disadvantageous in that it adds to the pollution. So, either of the arguments holds strong.
Statement: Are nuclear families better than joint families?
Arguments:
(I) No, joint families ensure greater security.
(II) Yes, nuclear families ensure greater freedom.
There is more security in joint family as there are other members to help.Also in nuclear families, there are lesser persons, so lesser responsibilities and more freedom. Hence, both arguments are strong.
Statement: Is buying things on installments to the customer ?
Arguments:
(I) Yes. He has to pay less.
(II) No. Paying installments upsets the family budget.
In buying things on installments, a customer has to pay more as the interest is also included. So, argument I does not hold. Moreover, one who buys an item on installments maintains his future budget accordingly as he is well a acquainted with when and how much he has to pay, beforehand. So, argument II is also not valid.
Statement: Should foreign films be banned in India ?
Arguments:
(I) Yes, they depict an alien culture which adversely affects our values
(II) No, foreign films are of a high artistic standard.
Clearly, foreign film depict the alien culture but they also help in learning. Hence, both arguments are not strong.
Statement: Should non-vegetarian food be totally banned in our country ?
Arguments:
(I) Yes, it is expensive and therefore it is beyond the means of most people in our country.
(II) No, nothing should be banned in a democratic country like hours.
Clearly, restriction on the diet of people will be denying them their basic human right. So, only argument II holds.
Statement: Should officers accepting bribes be punished ?
Arguments:
(I) No, certain circumstances may have compelled them to take bribe.
(II) Yes, they should do the job they are entrusted with, honestly.
Clearly, officers are paid duly for the jobs they do. So, They must do it honestly. Thus argument II alone holds.
Statement: Should girls learn art like judo and karate ?
Arguments:
(I) Yes, it will enable them to defined themselves from rogues and ruffians.
(II) No, they will loose their feminine grace.
Learning martial art is necessary for girls for self - defense. So, argument I holds. However, argument II is vague since a training in these art has nothing to do with their feminine grace.
Statement: Should students take part in politics ?
Arguments:
(I) Yes, it inculcates in them qualities of leadership.
(II) No, they should study and build up their career.
Clearly, Indulgement in politics trains the students for the future leadership but it sways them from the studies. So, either of the arguments I or II can hold.
Statement: Should 'computer knowledge' be made a compulsory subject for all the students at secondary school level ?
Arguments:
(I) No, our need is 'bread' for everyone, we cannot follow western models.
(II) Yes, we cannot compete in the international market without equipping our children with computers.
Nowadays, computers have entered all walks of life and children need to be prepared for the same. So, argument II is wrong. Argument I holds no relevance.