All Exams >
CLAT >
4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG >
All Questions
All questions of Strong & Weak Arguments for CLAT Exam
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Q. Statement: Should ‘Mid-day Meal’ scheme be handled over to state governments?Arguments:I. Yes; it is a matter of social welfare and state governments can implement it more effectively.
II. No, it will increase the burden on the state governments- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should ‘Mid-day Meal’ scheme be handled over to state governments?
Arguments:
I. Yes; it is a matter of social welfare and state governments can implement it more effectively.
II. No, it will increase the burden on the state governments
II. No, it will increase the burden on the state governments
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct option is C.
The central and state governments share the cost of the Midday Meal Scheme, with the centre providing 60 percent and the states 40 percent. The central government provides grains and financing for other food. Costs for facilities, transportation, and labour is shared by the federal and state governments.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q. Statement: Should HIV + kids be facilitated with ‘in-house school’ instead of allowing them to continue in ‘outside school?Arguments:I. Yes, this preventive step will ease the tension of majority of parents who send their wards to ‘outside schools’.II. No, ‘in-house school’ facility will isolate the children from the outside world; the move will harm the basic purpose of education and do the children more harm than good.a)If only argument I is “strong”.b)If only argument II is “strong”.c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.d)If both I and II are “strong”.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct answer is B as statement 2nd is more strong or more or which is directly relevant to the given statement as compare to first one because it relates only general reason.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer If only argument I is “strong”. If only argument II is “strong”. If neither I nor II is “strong”. If both I and II are “strong”. Q Statement: Should books be abridged?Arguments:I. Yes, it will be a great service to those who can’t afford time.II. No, it will be a great disservice to the author because the original flavour will be lost.- a)1
- b)2
- c)3
- d)4
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question.
Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer
If only argument I is “strong”.
If only argument II is “strong”.
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
If both I and II are “strong”.
Q Statement: Should books be abridged?
Arguments:
I. Yes, it will be a great service to those who can’t afford time.
II. No, it will be a great disservice to the author because the original flavour will be lost.
a)
1
b)
2
c)
3
d)
4
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
Abridging a book can make it worse than it's original form and reading inaccurate content is worse than completing the book faster.
Hence only second argument is correct
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q.
Should India support all the international policies of United States of America?Arguments:I. No, many other powerful countries do not support the same.II. Yes, this is the only way to gain access to USA developmental funds.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Should India support all the international policies of United States of America?
Should India support all the international policies of United States of America?
Arguments:
I. No, many other powerful countries do not support the same.
II. Yes, this is the only way to gain access to USA developmental funds.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
Dia Mehta answered |
Both the arguments are weak because you not support a country to gain it's support and You don't withdraw your support if other countries are doing the same.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be reservation in Government jobs for candidates from single child family?
Arguments:
I. No, this is not advisable as the jobs should be offered to only deserving candidates without any reservation for a particular group.
II. Yes, this will help reduce the growing population in India as the parents will be encouraged to adopt single child norm.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be reservation in Government jobs for candidates from single child family?
Arguments:
I. No, this is not advisable as the jobs should be offered to only deserving candidates without any reservation for a particular group.
II. Yes, this will help reduce the growing population in India as the parents will be encouraged to adopt single child norm.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
Glance Learning Institute answered |
The Government has already made provisions for reservation of jobs for the economically backward sections, which is a must. So, abolishing the practice of reservation altogether has no meaning. Thus, argument I is vague. Also, more reservations would lead to non-recruitment of many more deserving candidates. Besides, such a reservation, if implemented, will cater to the job requirements of only a small section of population and not a major part of it. So, argument II also does not hold strong.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Should there be a compete ban on use of pesticides in agricultural sector?
Arguments:
I. Yes, is the only way to save the underground water from getting polluted with such dangerous chemicals.
II. No this will adversely affect the agricultural production and the pests will damage the crops
- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Should there be a compete ban on use of pesticides in agricultural sector?
Arguments:
I. Yes, is the only way to save the underground water from getting polluted with such dangerous chemicals.
II. No this will adversely affect the agricultural production and the pests will damage the crops
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
Shreya Tiwari answered |
Option b is correct because the argument 1 states that banning pesticides is THE ONLY way to save underground water but we know that it is not the only way. Other measures can also be taken to reduce the pollution.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should those who receive dowry, despite the law prohibiting it, be punished?
Arguments:
I. Yes, those who violate the law, must be punished.
II. No, dowry system is firmly rooted in the society since time immemorial.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should those who receive dowry, despite the law prohibiting it, be punished?
Arguments:
I. Yes, those who violate the law, must be punished.
II. No, dowry system is firmly rooted in the society since time immemorial.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Alfiya Khan answered |
A is the correct option because arguement l is connected to the statement( prohibition and violation of law)
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the prestigious people who have committed crime unknowingly, be met with special treatment?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the prestigious people do not commit crime intentionally.
II. No, it is our policy that everybody is equal before the law.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the prestigious people who have committed crime unknowingly, be met with special treatment?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the prestigious people do not commit crime intentionally.
II. No, it is our policy that everybody is equal before the law.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
Shivani das answered |
Strong argument and which is a weak argument.
1. Should smoking be banned in public places?
I. Yes, smoking is harmful to health and non-smokers should not be forced to inhale second-hand smoke.
II. No, smoking is a personal choice and people should be allowed to smoke wherever they want.
Strong argument: I
Weak argument: II
1. Should smoking be banned in public places?
I. Yes, smoking is harmful to health and non-smokers should not be forced to inhale second-hand smoke.
II. No, smoking is a personal choice and people should be allowed to smoke wherever they want.
Strong argument: I
Weak argument: II
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q. Statement: Should public drinking be banned?Arguments:I. Yes, alcohol is a contributory factor in 40 per cent of violent crime.
II. No, one of the charms of remaining out late at night will be over.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should public drinking be banned?
Arguments:
I. Yes, alcohol is a contributory factor in 40 per cent of violent crime.
II. No, one of the charms of remaining out late at night will be over.
II. No, one of the charms of remaining out late at night will be over.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
Ankita Singh answered |
Correct option is A alcohol is a contributory factor in many cases of crime and option B is a weak argument because remaining out at night for drinking is not a strong argument.
Directions ): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer If only argument I is “strong”. If only argument II is “strong”. If neither I nor II is “strong”. If both I and II are “strong”. Q. Should all students passing out from the government run colleges and desirous of settling aboard be asked to pay back the cost of their education to the government? Arguments:I. Yes, such students who study on the resources of the exchequer should be discouraged to leave the country.II. No, every citizen has the right to select their place of further study or work and therefore such a condition is unjustified.- a)1
- b)2
- c)3
- d)4
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions ): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question.
Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer
If only argument I is “strong”.
If only argument II is “strong”.
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
If both I and II are “strong”.
Q. Should all students passing out from the government run colleges and desirous of settling aboard be asked to pay back the cost of their education to the government?
Arguments:
I. Yes, such students who study on the resources of the exchequer should be discouraged to leave the country.
II. No, every citizen has the right to select their place of further study or work and therefore such a condition is unjustified.
a)
1
b)
2
c)
3
d)
4
|
Kiran Reddy answered |
The first statement is strong enough as private colleges are known for their quality. To maintain this, they need to charge higher fees. The second statement is not strong enough as the fees of private colleges, if brought down, may bring down the quality. Meritorious students can always be given scholarships, etc.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be only one type of schools up to matriculation in the entire country?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this exists in some of the western countries.
II. No, schools in rural and urban areas need to be different.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be only one type of schools up to matriculation in the entire country?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this exists in some of the western countries.
II. No, schools in rural and urban areas need to be different.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
Nishant Upadhyay answered |
The answer is B because
If there is a uniform schooling system in western countries we can not assume that the same would work for our country.
Also rural and urban areas require different approaches due to various socio-economic difference
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should Railways levy a small modernization surcharge on the passengers?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It was greatly help the railways in generating the required funds for modernizing various facilities provided by them.
II. No. It will greatly imbalance the budget of an average household.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should Railways levy a small modernization surcharge on the passengers?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It was greatly help the railways in generating the required funds for modernizing various facilities provided by them.
II. No. It will greatly imbalance the budget of an average household.
Statement:
Should Railways levy a small modernization surcharge on the passengers?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It was greatly help the railways in generating the required funds for modernizing various facilities provided by them.
II. No. It will greatly imbalance the budget of an average household.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
I is strong as the surcharge will definitely help the railways in generating funds for the much needed modernization of the railways. On the other hand, such a minor surcharge is highly unlikely to greatly imbalance the budget of an average household. Thus, II is a weak argument.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should cricket be included in the Olympics?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It is hugely popular in countries like India and England.
II. No. On the whole, only a handful of countries have prominent cricket teams, whereas Olympics require participation from most of the countries of the World.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should cricket be included in the Olympics?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It is hugely popular in countries like India and England.
II. No. On the whole, only a handful of countries have prominent cricket teams, whereas Olympics require participation from most of the countries of the World.
Statement:
Should cricket be included in the Olympics?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It is hugely popular in countries like India and England.
II. No. On the whole, only a handful of countries have prominent cricket teams, whereas Olympics require participation from most of the countries of the World.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
A particular sport being hugely popular in a few countries is no reason for its inclusion in the Olympics which invites participation from almost all the countries. Thus, I is weak. If Cricket is played seriously by only a handful of countries, it’ll not generate interest as generated by other games of the Olympics. Thus, II is holds strong.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the city development authorities encourage construction of shopping malls which may result into closure of smaller shops?
Arguments:
I. Yes, in shopping malls one can get everything under one roof at a cheaper rate.
II. No, it will not be convenient for many people to go to a shopping mall for purchases of day-to-day requirements.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the city development authorities encourage construction of shopping malls which may result into closure of smaller shops?
Arguments:
I. Yes, in shopping malls one can get everything under one roof at a cheaper rate.
II. No, it will not be convenient for many people to go to a shopping mall for purchases of day-to-day requirements.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
Tushar Desai answered |
Strong argument and which is a weak argument.
1. Should smoking be banned in all public places?
I. Strong argument: Smoking is harmful not only to the smoker but also to the people around them. Therefore, it is necessary to ban smoking in all public places to protect the health of non-smokers.
II. Weak argument: Smoking is a personal choice and banning it in public places would infringe on the rights of smokers. People should be allowed to smoke in designated areas.
Answer: Strong argument: I is a strong argument because it is based on the health risks associated with smoking and the need to protect non-smokers from secondhand smoke. II is a weak argument because it fails to address the health risks associated with smoking and focuses only on the rights of smokers.
2. Should schools require students to wear uniforms?
I. Strong argument: Uniforms promote a sense of unity and equality among students. They also reduce the pressure on students to wear expensive or trendy clothing, which can create a sense of competition and division between students.
II. Weak argument: Uniforms are boring and restrictive. Students should be allowed to express their individuality through their clothing choices.
Answer: Strong argument: I is a strong argument because it highlights the benefits of uniforms in promoting a sense of unity and equality among students, as well as reducing pressure on students to conform to certain fashion trends. II is a weak argument because it focuses only on the potential drawbacks of uniforms without considering their benefits.
1. Should smoking be banned in all public places?
I. Strong argument: Smoking is harmful not only to the smoker but also to the people around them. Therefore, it is necessary to ban smoking in all public places to protect the health of non-smokers.
II. Weak argument: Smoking is a personal choice and banning it in public places would infringe on the rights of smokers. People should be allowed to smoke in designated areas.
Answer: Strong argument: I is a strong argument because it is based on the health risks associated with smoking and the need to protect non-smokers from secondhand smoke. II is a weak argument because it fails to address the health risks associated with smoking and focuses only on the rights of smokers.
2. Should schools require students to wear uniforms?
I. Strong argument: Uniforms promote a sense of unity and equality among students. They also reduce the pressure on students to wear expensive or trendy clothing, which can create a sense of competition and division between students.
II. Weak argument: Uniforms are boring and restrictive. Students should be allowed to express their individuality through their clothing choices.
Answer: Strong argument: I is a strong argument because it highlights the benefits of uniforms in promoting a sense of unity and equality among students, as well as reducing pressure on students to conform to certain fashion trends. II is a weak argument because it focuses only on the potential drawbacks of uniforms without considering their benefits.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should India give away Kashmir to Pakistan?
Arguments:
I. No, Kashmir is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for India.
II. Yes, this would help settle conflicts.
- a)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if only argument I is strong
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should India give away Kashmir to Pakistan?
Arguments:
I. No, Kashmir is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for India.
II. Yes, this would help settle conflicts.
a)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if only argument I is strong
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct option is A.
Clearly, India cannot part with a state that is a major foreign exchange earner to it. So, argument I holds strong. Further, giving away a piece of land unconditionally and unreasonably is no solution to settle disputes. So, argument II is vague.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Q.Should all students passing out from the government run colleges and desirous of settling aboard be asked to pay back the cost of their education to the government? Arguments:I. Yes, such students who study on the resources of the exchequer should be discouraged to leave the country.II. No, every citizen has the right to select their place of further study or work and therefore such a condition is unjustified.- a)If both I and II are “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”
- d)If only argument I is “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Should all students passing out from the government run colleges and desirous of settling aboard be asked to pay back the cost of their education to the government?
Arguments:
I. Yes, such students who study on the resources of the exchequer should be discouraged to leave the country.
II. No, every citizen has the right to select their place of further study or work and therefore such a condition is unjustified.
a)
If both I and II are “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”
d)
If only argument I is “strong”.
|
Srestha Banerjee answered |
Understanding the Arguments
In the question of whether students from government-run colleges should repay their education costs upon settling abroad, we analyze two arguments presented.
Argument I: Strong Argument
- The first argument states that students benefiting from government-funded education should be discouraged from leaving the country.
- This perspective emphasizes the importance of retaining skilled individuals within the nation to contribute to its growth and development.
- It is a strong argument because it addresses the broader implications of public investment in education and the expectations tied to such funding.
Argument II: Weak Argument
- The second argument posits that every citizen has the right to choose where to work or study, deeming the repayment condition unjustified.
- While this argument touches on individual rights, it lacks a direct relation to the core issue of public funding and societal responsibility.
- It does not adequately consider the implications of public expenditure and the reciprocal responsibilities that come with it.
Conclusion
- In summary, Argument I is deemed strong as it directly relates to the larger societal impact of government-funded education, while Argument II is weak because it focuses on individual rights without addressing the communal aspect of public investment.
- Therefore, the correct choice is option D, identifying only Argument I as a strong argument.
In the question of whether students from government-run colleges should repay their education costs upon settling abroad, we analyze two arguments presented.
Argument I: Strong Argument
- The first argument states that students benefiting from government-funded education should be discouraged from leaving the country.
- This perspective emphasizes the importance of retaining skilled individuals within the nation to contribute to its growth and development.
- It is a strong argument because it addresses the broader implications of public investment in education and the expectations tied to such funding.
Argument II: Weak Argument
- The second argument posits that every citizen has the right to choose where to work or study, deeming the repayment condition unjustified.
- While this argument touches on individual rights, it lacks a direct relation to the core issue of public funding and societal responsibility.
- It does not adequately consider the implications of public expenditure and the reciprocal responsibilities that come with it.
Conclusion
- In summary, Argument I is deemed strong as it directly relates to the larger societal impact of government-funded education, while Argument II is weak because it focuses on individual rights without addressing the communal aspect of public investment.
- Therefore, the correct choice is option D, identifying only Argument I as a strong argument.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should ‘Politics’ be taught in schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes. An informed electorate is the key to a strong democracy.
II. No. Politics and education should not be mixed as it will affect both adversely.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should ‘Politics’ be taught in schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes. An informed electorate is the key to a strong democracy.
II. No. Politics and education should not be mixed as it will affect both adversely.
Statement:
Should ‘Politics’ be taught in schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes. An informed electorate is the key to a strong democracy.
II. No. Politics and education should not be mixed as it will affect both adversely.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
Archana iyer answered |
Logical argument and which is a factual argument.
Question: Should smoking be banned in public places?
Argument I: Smoking should be banned in public places because it poses a health risk to both smokers and non-smokers. Secondhand smoke has been proven to be harmful to non-smokers, and by banning smoking in public places, we can protect the health of everyone.
Argument II: Smoking should not be banned in public places because it is a personal choice and people should have the freedom to smoke wherever they want. Banning smoking in public places would infringe on personal liberties and restrict individual freedom.
Logical argument: Argument I
Factual argument: Argument II
Question: Should smoking be banned in public places?
Argument I: Smoking should be banned in public places because it poses a health risk to both smokers and non-smokers. Secondhand smoke has been proven to be harmful to non-smokers, and by banning smoking in public places, we can protect the health of everyone.
Argument II: Smoking should not be banned in public places because it is a personal choice and people should have the freedom to smoke wherever they want. Banning smoking in public places would infringe on personal liberties and restrict individual freedom.
Logical argument: Argument I
Factual argument: Argument II
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the teenagers be denied access to the Internet?
Arguments:
I. Yes, most of the children, particularly the teenagers, are found indulging in accessing pornographic contents.
II. No, denying access to the Internet would mean denying access to a lot of useful information, instead the access may be controlled.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the teenagers be denied access to the Internet?
Arguments:
I. Yes, most of the children, particularly the teenagers, are found indulging in accessing pornographic contents.
II. No, denying access to the Internet would mean denying access to a lot of useful information, instead the access may be controlled.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
I is strong because an obsession with such contents creates a bad impact on their impressionable minds.
II is strong because in today's age one can't afford to lose access to information
Hence, option e is the correct answer.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
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 ours.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if only argument II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
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 ours.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if only argument II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Alok Malik answered |
Strong argument and which is a weak argument.
1. Should smoking be banned in all public places?
I. Strong argument: Smoking is a major cause of health problems, and non-smokers should not be subjected to the harmful effects of second-hand smoke.
II. Weak argument: Banning smoking in public places infringes on the rights of smokers to enjoy their habit.
Strong argument: Argument I presents a valid and compelling reason for banning smoking in public places, as it focuses on the health risks associated with second-hand smoke. Argument II, on the other hand, is a weak argument as it is based on the assumption that smokers have a right to smoke in public places, which is not a universally accepted premise.
1. Should smoking be banned in all public places?
I. Strong argument: Smoking is a major cause of health problems, and non-smokers should not be subjected to the harmful effects of second-hand smoke.
II. Weak argument: Banning smoking in public places infringes on the rights of smokers to enjoy their habit.
Strong argument: Argument I presents a valid and compelling reason for banning smoking in public places, as it focuses on the health risks associated with second-hand smoke. Argument II, on the other hand, is a weak argument as it is based on the assumption that smokers have a right to smoke in public places, which is not a universally accepted premise.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be only two political parties in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, in many developed countries there are only two political parties.
II. No, Indian electorate is not mature to select between only two political parties.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be only two political parties in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, in many developed countries there are only two political parties.
II. No, Indian electorate is not mature to select between only two political parties.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
Kirti choudhary answered |
Understanding the Arguments
When evaluating the arguments regarding whether there should be only two political parties in India, it's essential to analyze the strength of each argument presented.
Argument I: Yes, in many developed countries there are only two political parties.
- This argument suggests that the presence of two political parties is a standard in developed nations.
- However, it fails to consider the unique socio-political context of India.
- Just because a system works in some countries does not mean it will work effectively in another.
- Therefore, this argument is weak as it lacks a tailored rationale for India’s situation.
Argument II: No, Indian electorate is not mature to select between only two political parties.
- This argument posits that the Indian electorate may not have the maturity required to choose between only two options effectively.
- While it raises a crucial point regarding the political awareness and engagement of the electorate, it also lacks constructive evidence.
- It does not provide clarity on what "maturity" means or how it directly impacts the choice between two parties.
- Thus, it is also a weak argument.
Conclusion: Analysis of Strength
- Both arguments presented do not adequately support their claims.
- Argument I does not consider India's unique political landscape, and Argument II does not substantiate its assertion about the electorate's maturity.
- Hence, the correct answer is option **D**: neither argument I nor II is strong.
This evaluation illustrates that both arguments lack the necessary depth and relevance to be considered strong in the context of the question posed.
When evaluating the arguments regarding whether there should be only two political parties in India, it's essential to analyze the strength of each argument presented.
Argument I: Yes, in many developed countries there are only two political parties.
- This argument suggests that the presence of two political parties is a standard in developed nations.
- However, it fails to consider the unique socio-political context of India.
- Just because a system works in some countries does not mean it will work effectively in another.
- Therefore, this argument is weak as it lacks a tailored rationale for India’s situation.
Argument II: No, Indian electorate is not mature to select between only two political parties.
- This argument posits that the Indian electorate may not have the maturity required to choose between only two options effectively.
- While it raises a crucial point regarding the political awareness and engagement of the electorate, it also lacks constructive evidence.
- It does not provide clarity on what "maturity" means or how it directly impacts the choice between two parties.
- Thus, it is also a weak argument.
Conclusion: Analysis of Strength
- Both arguments presented do not adequately support their claims.
- Argument I does not consider India's unique political landscape, and Argument II does not substantiate its assertion about the electorate's maturity.
- Hence, the correct answer is option **D**: neither argument I nor II is strong.
This evaluation illustrates that both arguments lack the necessary depth and relevance to be considered strong in the context of the question posed.
Directions ): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer If only argument I is “strong”. If only argument II is “strong”. If neither I nor II is “strong”. If both I and II are “strong”. Q. Should the subsidy on kerosene be immediately increased further?Arguments:I. Yes, this will bring considerable relief to the poorer section of the society as they will be the major beneficiary.II. No, our economy is otherwise in a difficult stage and it will not be able to withstand any further burden on it.- a)1
- b)2
- c)3
- d)4
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions ): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question.
Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer
If only argument I is “strong”.
If only argument II is “strong”.
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
If both I and II are “strong”.
Q. Should the subsidy on kerosene be immediately increased further?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will bring considerable relief to the poorer section of the society as they will be the major beneficiary.
II. No, our economy is otherwise in a difficult stage and it will not be able to withstand any further burden on it.
a)
1
b)
2
c)
3
d)
4
|
|
Puja Basu answered |
According to the first arguement it will be beneficial and affordable for the poor section while according to the second arguement now a days our economical growth is a bit slow , so giving more subsidy on kerosene may create a nuisance in the future.
So option d is correct.
So option d is correct.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer If only argument I is “strong”. If only argument II is “strong”. If neither I nor II is “strong”. If both I and II are “strong”. Q Statement: Should foreign surgeons be allowed to conduct surgeries in India?Arguments:I. No; Indian surgeons are not permitted to conduct surgeries abroad.II. No; foreign surgeons work here in an unfamiliar environment with new assistants and often with less than optimal instruments than they are used to.- a)1
- b)3
- c)2
- d)4
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question.
Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer
If only argument I is “strong”.
If only argument II is “strong”.
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
If both I and II are “strong”.
Q Statement: Should foreign surgeons be allowed to conduct surgeries in India?
Arguments:
I. No; Indian surgeons are not permitted to conduct surgeries abroad.
II. No; foreign surgeons work here in an unfamiliar environment with new assistants and often with less than optimal instruments than they are used to.
a)
1
b)
3
c)
2
d)
4
|
|
Roy Kunal Singh answered |
Argument 1 - A country can't follow any other country decision Blindly. May be that country have enough surgeons. So this argument is weak.
Argument 2 - Foreign surgeons use Many high tech surgical instruments. Indian surgeons can work without those instruments easily. Another problem is communication during surgery. So this argument is strong.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should the Government introduce Gross Happiness Index on the lines of that introduced in Bhutan?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will greatly help India in becoming a prosperous nation.
II. No. Bhutan has not gone anywhere even after introducing GHI over four decades ago.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should the Government introduce Gross Happiness Index on the lines of that introduced in Bhutan?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will greatly help India in becoming a prosperous nation.
II. No. Bhutan has not gone anywhere even after introducing GHI over four decades ago.
Statement:
Should the Government introduce Gross Happiness Index on the lines of that introduced in Bhutan?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will greatly help India in becoming a prosperous nation.
II. No. Bhutan has not gone anywhere even after introducing GHI over four decades ago.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
Nitin prakash answered |
Strong argument and which is a weak argument.
Question: Should the government increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products?
Argument I: Yes, the government should increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will discourage people from consuming these harmful products and will also generate additional revenue for the government.
Argument II: No, the government should not increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will only lead to an increase in black market sales and smuggling of these products, which will be difficult to control.
Strong argument: Argument I - Yes, the government should increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will discourage people from consuming these harmful products and will also generate additional revenue for the government.
Weak argument: Argument II - No, the government should not increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will only lead to an increase in black market sales and smuggling of these products, which will be difficult to control.
Explanation: Argument I presents a strong argument as it provides valid reasons for increasing taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. It highlights the potential benefits of discouraging consumption and generating additional revenue. On the other hand, Argument II presents a weak argument as it only focuses on the potential negative consequences of higher taxes without considering the potential benefits. Additionally, it assumes that increased taxes will inevitably lead to an increase in black market sales and smuggling, without providing sufficient evidence to support this claim.
Question: Should the government increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products?
Argument I: Yes, the government should increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will discourage people from consuming these harmful products and will also generate additional revenue for the government.
Argument II: No, the government should not increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will only lead to an increase in black market sales and smuggling of these products, which will be difficult to control.
Strong argument: Argument I - Yes, the government should increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will discourage people from consuming these harmful products and will also generate additional revenue for the government.
Weak argument: Argument II - No, the government should not increase taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. Higher taxes will only lead to an increase in black market sales and smuggling of these products, which will be difficult to control.
Explanation: Argument I presents a strong argument as it provides valid reasons for increasing taxes on alcohol and tobacco products. It highlights the potential benefits of discouraging consumption and generating additional revenue. On the other hand, Argument II presents a weak argument as it only focuses on the potential negative consequences of higher taxes without considering the potential benefits. Additionally, it assumes that increased taxes will inevitably lead to an increase in black market sales and smuggling, without providing sufficient evidence to support this claim.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should there be restrictions on free media?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Sometimes restrictions are needed to control free media.
II. No. It’s the fourth pillar of our democracy.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should there be restrictions on free media?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Sometimes restrictions are needed to control free media.
II. No. It’s the fourth pillar of our democracy.
Statement:
Should there be restrictions on free media?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Sometimes restrictions are needed to control free media.
II. No. It’s the fourth pillar of our democracy.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
I doesn’t provide any argument, but merely restate the Statement differently. Thus, I is weak. Just because the media is the fourth pillar of democracy doesn’t mean that it should operate without legitimate and rightful restrictions on it. Thus, II is also weak.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should all correspondence courses at graduate level be stopped?
Arguments:
I. No, correspondence courses help needy students to pursue studies and earn at the same time.
II. Yes, quality education is not possible without teachers and classrooms.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should all correspondence courses at graduate level be stopped?
Arguments:
I. No, correspondence courses help needy students to pursue studies and earn at the same time.
II. Yes, quality education is not possible without teachers and classrooms.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Glance Learning Institute answered |
Argument I is strong as it is desirable to help the needy students. Argument II is strong as compromising with quality education does not fulfil the purpose of education.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be a total ban on use of plastic bags?
Arguments:
I. No, instead the thickness of plastic bags, which can be used without much damage to the environment, should be specified.
II. Yes, use of plastic bags causes various problems like water pollution and water-logging and hence it is necessary to ban it.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be a total ban on use of plastic bags?
Arguments:
I. No, instead the thickness of plastic bags, which can be used without much damage to the environment, should be specified.
II. Yes, use of plastic bags causes various problems like water pollution and water-logging and hence it is necessary to ban it.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Trisha menon answered |
Argument Analysis:
Argument I:
- This argument suggests that instead of a total ban on plastic bags, the focus should be on specifying the thickness of plastic bags that can be used without causing significant harm to the environment.
- This argument acknowledges the practical use of plastic bags but emphasizes the need for regulation to minimize environmental damage.
Argument II:
- This argument advocates for a total ban on plastic bags due to the various problems they cause, such as water pollution and water-logging.
- It highlights the negative impact of plastic bags on the environment and argues for a drastic measure to address these issues.
Evaluation:
- Both arguments present valid points regarding the use of plastic bags and its impact on the environment.
- Argument I focuses on regulation and control, suggesting a nuanced approach to address the issue.
- Argument II takes a more drastic stance, calling for a complete ban to tackle the environmental problems caused by plastic bags.
- Considering the severity of environmental issues associated with plastic bags, a combination of regulation and prohibition might be the most effective solution.
Therefore, both arguments I and II are strong as they offer different perspectives on how to address the problem of plastic bag usage, with each argument providing valid reasoning for its position.
Argument I:
- This argument suggests that instead of a total ban on plastic bags, the focus should be on specifying the thickness of plastic bags that can be used without causing significant harm to the environment.
- This argument acknowledges the practical use of plastic bags but emphasizes the need for regulation to minimize environmental damage.
Argument II:
- This argument advocates for a total ban on plastic bags due to the various problems they cause, such as water pollution and water-logging.
- It highlights the negative impact of plastic bags on the environment and argues for a drastic measure to address these issues.
Evaluation:
- Both arguments present valid points regarding the use of plastic bags and its impact on the environment.
- Argument I focuses on regulation and control, suggesting a nuanced approach to address the issue.
- Argument II takes a more drastic stance, calling for a complete ban to tackle the environmental problems caused by plastic bags.
- Considering the severity of environmental issues associated with plastic bags, a combination of regulation and prohibition might be the most effective solution.
Therefore, both arguments I and II are strong as they offer different perspectives on how to address the problem of plastic bag usage, with each argument providing valid reasoning for its position.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be uniforms for students in the colleges in India as in the schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will improve the ambience of the colleges as all the students will be decently dressed.
II. No, college students should not be regimented and they should be left to choose their clothes for coming to college.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong
- c)if either argument I or II is strong
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be uniforms for students in the colleges in India as in the schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will improve the ambience of the colleges as all the students will be decently dressed.
II. No, college students should not be regimented and they should be left to choose their clothes for coming to college.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong
c)
if either argument I or II is strong
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
Bibek Menon answered |
The correct option is E
If both I and II are strong
Argument I is strong as improved ambience is desirable. Argument II is strong because segmentation of adults is undesirable
If both I and II are strong
Argument I is strong as improved ambience is desirable. Argument II is strong because segmentation of adults is undesirable
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the sale of tobacco products be restricted to only a few outlets in each city/town?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will substantially reduce consumption of tobacco products.
II. No, those who want to purchase tobacco products should get them at convenient locations.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the sale of tobacco products be restricted to only a few outlets in each city/town?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will substantially reduce consumption of tobacco products.
II. No, those who want to purchase tobacco products should get them at convenient locations.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Naman Agrawal answered |
Generally, limiting the sale of something is undertaken to reduce it's consumption in the market and that what it is done with tobbaco. So, argument (a) is strong, while second one is irrelevant to the topic.
Directions: each of the following questions consist of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. Choose the best answer from the given options.Statement: Should a lot of money be spent on promoting movies?Arguments:
A. Yes. It is an essential component of attracting more audience.
B. No. it only leads to wastage of resources.- a)Only A
- b)Only B
- c)Either A or B
- d)Neither A or B
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: each of the following questions consist of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. Choose the best answer from the given options.
Statement: Should a lot of money be spent on promoting movies?
Arguments:
A. Yes. It is an essential component of attracting more audience.
B. No. it only leads to wastage of resources.
A. Yes. It is an essential component of attracting more audience.
B. No. it only leads to wastage of resources.
a)
Only A
b)
Only B
c)
Either A or B
d)
Neither A or B
|
|
Jyoti patil answered |
The benefit of producing a movie lies in the fact that the film earns money along with creative appreciation. These two things are only possible if the viewers watch these movies. The best means to attract viewers is through promotions where the movies are officially introduced allowing the viewers to analyze whether a particular movie is worth meeting their expectations. Hence, argument A strongly justifies the given statement. Argument B which talks about the wastage of money through promotions is quite weak because promotions are investments so that the gain at the end can be better. It is no way can it be considered as ‘only’ wastage of money. Hence, 1 is the correct answer.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q. Statement: Should conditional access system (CAS) for TVs be put in place in India?Arguments:I. Yes, this will enable television viewers of India the freedom to access the channel of their choice and pay for only the ones selected.
II. No, the system negates the basic requirements such as the rights and obligations of broadcasters, cable operators and consumers. Besides, instead of offering a real choice to consumers at reasonable costs, the system promotes commercial interests of broad-casters or set-top manufacturers.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should conditional access system (CAS) for TVs be put in place in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will enable television viewers of India the freedom to access the channel of their choice and pay for only the ones selected.
II. No, the system negates the basic requirements such as the rights and obligations of broadcasters, cable operators and consumers. Besides, instead of offering a real choice to consumers at reasonable costs, the system promotes commercial interests of broad-casters or set-top manufacturers.
II. No, the system negates the basic requirements such as the rights and obligations of broadcasters, cable operators and consumers. Besides, instead of offering a real choice to consumers at reasonable costs, the system promotes commercial interests of broad-casters or set-top manufacturers.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
the correct option is D. as both the statements are the direct results of the CAS system and both carry strong opinions .
Directions ): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer If only argument I is “strong”. If only argument II is “strong”. If neither I nor II is “strong”. If both I and II are “strong”. Q. Should labour reforms be immediately introduced in India?Arguments: I. Yes, this will help increase the productivity in all the sectors in general and in the public sector in particular.II. No, many other countries have not implemented this so far.- a)1
- b)2
- c)3
- d)4
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions ): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question.
Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer
If only argument I is “strong”.
If only argument II is “strong”.
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
If both I and II are “strong”.
Q. Should labour reforms be immediately introduced in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will help increase the productivity in all the sectors in general and in the public sector in particular.
II. No, many other countries have not implemented this so far.
a)
1
b)
2
c)
3
d)
4
|
Kritika Singha answered |
The answer has to be "a" as statement 1 is in direct relation with the question whereas the second statement is not. statement 1 is an exact answer for the question asked.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument. Q. Statement: Should Doordarshan give the Govt of the day precedence over others in the selection of news?Arguments: I. Yes, the achievements of the country come through the agency of the Govt.
II. No, the BBC does not give precedence to the govt of the UK.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q. Statement: Should Doordarshan give the Govt of the day precedence over others in the selection of news?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the achievements of the country come through the agency of the Govt.
II. No, the BBC does not give precedence to the govt of the UK.
II. No, the BBC does not give precedence to the govt of the UK.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct answer is A as i statement is strong second one is making the comparison which makes it weak.
Statement: Should India encourage exports, when most things are insufficient for internal use itself?
Arguments 1: Yes, We have to earn foreign exchange to pay for our imports.
Argument 2: No. Even selective encouragement would lead to shortages.
- a)Only argument I is strong
- b)Only argument II is strong
- c)Neither I nor II is strong
- d)Both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Statement: Should India encourage exports, when most things are insufficient for internal use itself?
Arguments 1: Yes, We have to earn foreign exchange to pay for our imports.
Argument 2: No. Even selective encouragement would lead to shortages.
Arguments 1: Yes, We have to earn foreign exchange to pay for our imports.
Argument 2: No. Even selective encouragement would lead to shortages.
a)
Only argument I is strong
b)
Only argument II is strong
c)
Neither I nor II is strong
d)
Both I and II are strong
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Both are strong. First is simple and straightforward. It is also true. Second is also correct, specially when seen in the light of the fact that the question itself states that there are shortages for internal use itself.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should young people move away from home when they’ve crossed the age of 18?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It greatly helps them in standing on their own feet and becoming independent.
II. No. Their parents need their support.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should young people move away from home when they’ve crossed the age of 18?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It greatly helps them in standing on their own feet and becoming independent.
II. No. Their parents need their support.
Statement:
Should young people move away from home when they’ve crossed the age of 18?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It greatly helps them in standing on their own feet and becoming independent.
II. No. Their parents need their support.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
|
Nikita das answered |
Understanding the Arguments
In assessing the arguments regarding whether young people should move away from home after turning 18, we need to evaluate their strength based on the implications they present.
Argument I: Pro-Independence
- Independence Development: Argument I suggests that moving out at 18 fosters independence. This is a strong argument as it emphasizes personal growth and the importance of learning to manage one’s own life, finances, and responsibilities.
- Life Skills Acquisition: Living independently helps young individuals acquire essential life skills, which are crucial for their future success. This aligns with the general perception that independence at a young age can lead to more self-reliance in adulthood.
Argument II: Family Support
- Parental Dependence: Argument II states that young people should not move out because their parents need their support. While this argument highlights familial bonds, it is comparatively weak because it overlooks the potential benefits of independence for the young individual.
- Lack of Personal Growth: Relying on parents for support can inhibit the young person's personal development and ability to cope with life's challenges. This argument does not effectively counter the advantages proposed in Argument I.
Conclusion
- Given these evaluations, Argument I is strong due to its focus on personal development and independence.
- Argument II is weak as it fails to provide a compelling reason for young individuals to remain at home, thus making the correct choice option 'A' – only Argument I is strong.
In assessing the arguments regarding whether young people should move away from home after turning 18, we need to evaluate their strength based on the implications they present.
Argument I: Pro-Independence
- Independence Development: Argument I suggests that moving out at 18 fosters independence. This is a strong argument as it emphasizes personal growth and the importance of learning to manage one’s own life, finances, and responsibilities.
- Life Skills Acquisition: Living independently helps young individuals acquire essential life skills, which are crucial for their future success. This aligns with the general perception that independence at a young age can lead to more self-reliance in adulthood.
Argument II: Family Support
- Parental Dependence: Argument II states that young people should not move out because their parents need their support. While this argument highlights familial bonds, it is comparatively weak because it overlooks the potential benefits of independence for the young individual.
- Lack of Personal Growth: Relying on parents for support can inhibit the young person's personal development and ability to cope with life's challenges. This argument does not effectively counter the advantages proposed in Argument I.
Conclusion
- Given these evaluations, Argument I is strong due to its focus on personal development and independence.
- Argument II is weak as it fails to provide a compelling reason for young individuals to remain at home, thus making the correct choice option 'A' – only Argument I is strong.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should the vehicle of anyone driving without a licence be impounded?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Driving without a licence is in violation of law.
II. No. Sometimes people hesitate to keep the original licence with them at all times due to the fear of misplacing them.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should the vehicle of anyone driving without a licence be impounded?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Driving without a licence is in violation of law.
II. No. Sometimes people hesitate to keep the original licence with them at all times due to the fear of misplacing them.
Statement:
Should the vehicle of anyone driving without a licence be impounded?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Driving without a licence is in violation of law.
II. No. Sometimes people hesitate to keep the original licence with them at all times due to the fear of misplacing them.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
Sudha shah answered |
Understanding the Arguments
When evaluating the arguments regarding whether the vehicle of anyone driving without a licence should be impounded, we analyze their strength based on legal principles and practical considerations.
Argument I: Strong Argument
- Legal Violation:
- Driving without a licence is a clear violation of the law.
- Laws are established to ensure public safety and accountability.
- Impounding the vehicle acts as a deterrent against unlawful driving behavior.
- Consequences of Lawbreaking:
- Enforcing penalties, such as impounding vehicles, reinforces the importance of adhering to legal requirements.
- It serves as a warning to others who might consider driving without proper documentation.
Argument II: Weak Argument
- Fear of Misplacement:
- The argument suggests that some individuals may not carry their licence due to fear of losing it.
- However, this does not justify the act of driving without a licence.
- Legal Responsibility:
- Every driver is responsible for ensuring they have their licence while operating a vehicle.
- The potential for misplacing a licence does not negate the obligation to follow legal norms.
Conclusion
In summary, while Argument I is grounded in legal principles and the necessity of upholding the law, Argument II lacks sufficient justification for allowing unlawful behavior. Thus, the correct answer is option 'A', which states that only Argument I is strong.
When evaluating the arguments regarding whether the vehicle of anyone driving without a licence should be impounded, we analyze their strength based on legal principles and practical considerations.
Argument I: Strong Argument
- Legal Violation:
- Driving without a licence is a clear violation of the law.
- Laws are established to ensure public safety and accountability.
- Impounding the vehicle acts as a deterrent against unlawful driving behavior.
- Consequences of Lawbreaking:
- Enforcing penalties, such as impounding vehicles, reinforces the importance of adhering to legal requirements.
- It serves as a warning to others who might consider driving without proper documentation.
Argument II: Weak Argument
- Fear of Misplacement:
- The argument suggests that some individuals may not carry their licence due to fear of losing it.
- However, this does not justify the act of driving without a licence.
- Legal Responsibility:
- Every driver is responsible for ensuring they have their licence while operating a vehicle.
- The potential for misplacing a licence does not negate the obligation to follow legal norms.
Conclusion
In summary, while Argument I is grounded in legal principles and the necessity of upholding the law, Argument II lacks sufficient justification for allowing unlawful behavior. Thus, the correct answer is option 'A', which states that only Argument I is strong.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should Census be done more often?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Lot of people migrate from one place to another quite frequently and the census results might be obsolete within a year.
II. No. There are huge costs associated with carrying out the census and increasing its frequency might put unnecessary burden on the exchequer.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should Census be done more often?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Lot of people migrate from one place to another quite frequently and the census results might be obsolete within a year.
II. No. There are huge costs associated with carrying out the census and increasing its frequency might put unnecessary burden on the exchequer.
Statement:
Should Census be done more often?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Lot of people migrate from one place to another quite frequently and the census results might be obsolete within a year.
II. No. There are huge costs associated with carrying out the census and increasing its frequency might put unnecessary burden on the exchequer.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
The migration of even a large number of people, except in exceptional situations, is unlikely to make the census, which takes into account the whole population of a particular place, obsolete within a year. Thus, I is weak. II rightly points out the problem with carrying out census more frequently, the problem of costs of such operations. Thus, II holds strong.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should ‘Personal Finance’ be taught in schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will equip the school students with knowledge about investing, savings etc and help them in making informed decisions when they’re earning.
II. No. School students should be kept away from money matters as it can have a negative impact on them.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should ‘Personal Finance’ be taught in schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will equip the school students with knowledge about investing, savings etc and help them in making informed decisions when they’re earning.
II. No. School students should be kept away from money matters as it can have a negative impact on them.
Statement:
Should ‘Personal Finance’ be taught in schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will equip the school students with knowledge about investing, savings etc and help them in making informed decisions when they’re earning.
II. No. School students should be kept away from money matters as it can have a negative impact on them.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
I is self-explanatory and is a strong argument. II does not show how and why money matters will have a negative impact on the school going students. Thus, II is a weak argument.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be only a uniform rate of income tax irrespective of the level of income?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will substantially reduce the work of the officials of the income tax department.
II. No, this will reduce Govt. tax collection to a large extent.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should there be only a uniform rate of income tax irrespective of the level of income?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will substantially reduce the work of the officials of the income tax department.
II. No, this will reduce Govt. tax collection to a large extent.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Urvashi nayar answered |
The correct option is B.
Argument I is weak because the reduction of workload of IT officials is not too desirable motive. Argument II is strong as reduced tax collection ill have bad impact on state activities.
Argument I is weak because the reduction of workload of IT officials is not too desirable motive. Argument II is strong as reduced tax collection ill have bad impact on state activities.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the educated unemployed youth be paid “unemployment allowance” by the Government?
Arguments:
I. Yes, it will provide them some monetary help to either seek employment or to kickstart some ‘self- employment’ venture.
II. No, it will dampen their urge to do something to earn their livelihood and thus promote idleness among the unemployed youth.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the educated unemployed youth be paid “unemployment allowance” by the Government?
Arguments:
I. Yes, it will provide them some monetary help to either seek employment or to kickstart some ‘self- employment’ venture.
II. No, it will dampen their urge to do something to earn their livelihood and thus promote idleness among the unemployed youth.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
Knowledge Hub answered |
Young people, who do not get employment due to the large number of applicants in all fields, must surely be given allowance so that they can support themselves. So, argument I is valid. However, such allowances would mar the spirit to work, in them and make them idle. So, argument II also holds.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q. Statement: Should foreign collaborations in higher education be allowed without proper scrutiny?Arguments: I. No, no organisation should be allowed without proper scrutiny because sometimes these collaborations turn out to be frauds. There are cases where the organisation promises job security and other facilities for students but which, in reality, are nothing but a shame.
II. No, our country is already facing the problem of ‘brain drain’. Many foreign universities and institutes lure talented and hardworking students to join their courses which subsequently lead to ‘brain drain’ as they promise lucrative jobs in foreign countries.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should foreign collaborations in higher education be allowed without proper scrutiny?
Arguments:
I. No, no organisation should be allowed without proper scrutiny because sometimes these collaborations turn out to be frauds. There are cases where the organisation promises job security and other facilities for students but which, in reality, are nothing but a shame.
II. No, our country is already facing the problem of ‘brain drain’. Many foreign universities and institutes lure talented and hardworking students to join their courses which subsequently lead to ‘brain drain’ as they promise lucrative jobs in foreign countries.
II. No, our country is already facing the problem of ‘brain drain’. Many foreign universities and institutes lure talented and hardworking students to join their courses which subsequently lead to ‘brain drain’ as they promise lucrative jobs in foreign countries.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
|
Sakshi Jhanji answered |
D
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q. Statements: Should markets be opened till late night in all metropolitan cities of India?
Arguments:
I. Yes; the move will make the Indian metropolitan cities at par with other well-developed cities in the world.
II. No; high percentage of personal and national income gets spent on immediate consumption needs; little is left for investment capital.
- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q. Statements: Should markets be opened till late night in all metropolitan cities of India?
Arguments:
I. Yes; the move will make the Indian metropolitan cities at par with other well-developed cities in the world.
II. No; high percentage of personal and national income gets spent on immediate consumption needs; little is left for investment capital.
Q. Statements: Should markets be opened till late night in all metropolitan cities of India?
Arguments:
I. Yes; the move will make the Indian metropolitan cities at par with other well-developed cities in the world.
II. No; high percentage of personal and national income gets spent on immediate consumption needs; little is left for investment capital.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
Gargi Shukla answered |
Neither one or two is strong because the statment "Should markets be opened till late night in all metropolitan cities of India?" is related to the need the common public who are supposed to buy the product. It depends whether the majority of people work till late night or not and need market as source to provide products all the time because it is not the scenario in all the metropolitan cities.
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should corporal punishment be banned in schools?
Arguments:
I. No. Teachers as responsible adults can be trusted with using the punishment only as a last resort, and on a case-to-case basis.
II. Yes. Hitting a student is only an easy way out to create an image of trying to change the student, whereas there are better options available for fundamentally changing the behaviour of the student.- a)If only argument I is strong
- b)If only argument II is strong
- c)If either I or II is strong
- d)If neither I nor II is strong
- e)If both I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: This question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the following arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.
Statement:
Should corporal punishment be banned in schools?
Arguments:
I. No. Teachers as responsible adults can be trusted with using the punishment only as a last resort, and on a case-to-case basis.
II. Yes. Hitting a student is only an easy way out to create an image of trying to change the student, whereas there are better options available for fundamentally changing the behaviour of the student.
Statement:
Should corporal punishment be banned in schools?
Arguments:
I. No. Teachers as responsible adults can be trusted with using the punishment only as a last resort, and on a case-to-case basis.
II. Yes. Hitting a student is only an easy way out to create an image of trying to change the student, whereas there are better options available for fundamentally changing the behaviour of the student.
a)
If only argument I is strong
b)
If only argument II is strong
c)
If either I or II is strong
d)
If neither I nor II is strong
e)
If both I and II are strong
|
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
If teachers as responsible adults were indeed to be blindly trusted, there was no actual need for such a debate. But experience show that many a times such punishment is inflicted in totally inappropriate and inapt situations. Thus, I is weak. II is self-explanatory and is a strong argument.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q.Statement: Should there be reservations for widows, divorcees in the government jobs?Arguments:I. Yes; widows and divorcees belong to the weaker section of the society.
II. No; percentage of reservation in government jobs has already reached its highest level.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should there be reservations for widows, divorcees in the government jobs?
Arguments:
I. Yes; widows and divorcees belong to the weaker section of the society.
II. No; percentage of reservation in government jobs has already reached its highest level.
II. No; percentage of reservation in government jobs has already reached its highest level.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
- Argument I: This is a strong argument because it highlights a valid societal issue. Widows and divorcees may face significant challenges and disadvantages, making them part of a vulnerable group that might benefit from reservations in government jobs.
- Argument II: This is also a strong argument as it points out a practical concern. Reservations in government jobs have limits, and increasing them further could lead to issues such as reduced opportunities for non-reserved candidates or exceeding reasonable quotas.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should there be reservation for the very poor among the upper castes?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the purpose of reservation is to uplift the standard of the life of the weaker section of the people, which includes the very poor among the upper castes also.
II. No, the move will divide people of upper castes and will harm age-old social structure too.
- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should there be reservation for the very poor among the upper castes?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the purpose of reservation is to uplift the standard of the life of the weaker section of the people, which includes the very poor among the upper castes also.
II. No, the move will divide people of upper castes and will harm age-old social structure too.
Q.
Statement: Should there be reservation for the very poor among the upper castes?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the purpose of reservation is to uplift the standard of the life of the weaker section of the people, which includes the very poor among the upper castes also.
II. No, the move will divide people of upper castes and will harm age-old social structure too.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
Tarun Pillai answered |
I is the very rationale behind the establishment of trade unions. Hence I is strong.
Illegal demand cannot be fulfilled unless the management is fully convinced of the reason-ability of their demands. Hence II is weak.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should all the universities in the country switch over to grade system rather than awarding marks?
Arguments:
I. Yes, with this the students falling in a particular range of marks can be treated on par.
II. No, it will be difficult to rank the students when required to be short-listed.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should all the universities in the country switch over to grade system rather than awarding marks?
Arguments:
I. Yes, with this the students falling in a particular range of marks can be treated on par.
II. No, it will be difficult to rank the students when required to be short-listed.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Devika das answered |
The correct option is E.
Argument I is strong because it states genuine reason. Argument II is also strong because it is true.
Argument I is strong because it states genuine reason. Argument II is also strong because it is true.
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q.
Statement: Should doctors and engineers be banned from civil services examination?Arguments: I. No, banning engineers and medicos from joining civil services means denying the best talent in the land to work for the welfare of the society.
II. Yes, taxpayers money is being used to finance the studies of doctors and engineers, particularly in government institutes. The money spent on them goes down the drain once a medico or engineer shifts tracks to civil services. - a)If both I and II are “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If only argument I is “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should doctors and engineers be banned from civil services examination?
Statement: Should doctors and engineers be banned from civil services examination?
Arguments:
I. No, banning engineers and medicos from joining civil services means denying the best talent in the land to work for the welfare of the society.
II. Yes, taxpayers money is being used to finance the studies of doctors and engineers, particularly in government institutes. The money spent on them goes down the drain once a medico or engineer shifts tracks to civil services.
II. Yes, taxpayers money is being used to finance the studies of doctors and engineers, particularly in government institutes. The money spent on them goes down the drain once a medico or engineer shifts tracks to civil services.
a)
If both I and II are “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If only argument I is “strong”.
|
Vaibhav Chaudhary answered |
Statement I is strong because if we deny doctors and engineers we are actually denying professional talented people from working for the society as they wishStatement II is not strong because taxpayer's money is not wasted if someone goes to work in civil service, the person is still working for the people. Moreover taxpayer's money is not used for private college students too
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q.Statement: Should those above 75 quit politics?Arguments:I. Yes, they are more fit for social service.
II. No, we still have politicians in India above 75.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should those above 75 quit politics?
Arguments:
I. Yes, they are more fit for social service.
II. No, we still have politicians in India above 75.
II. No, we still have politicians in India above 75.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
|
Nishtha Pandey answered |
Their is no age for any social service or to be a part of also it doesn't matter do we have or not any leader above 75.
so, neither I nor II is strong
so, neither I nor II is strong
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.Q. Statement: Should there be a common foundation course in the first year, regardless of the discipline, for all the science students?
Arguments: I. Yes; the success rate of the science students is quite lower that of arts students.
II. Yes; the move will facilitate students to switch discipline after the first year.- a)If only argument I is “strong”.
- b)If only argument II is “strong”.
- c)If neither I nor II is “strong”.
- d)If both I and II are “strong”.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions : In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “strong” arguments and “weak” arguments in so far as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the argument is a “strong” argument is and which is a “weak” argument.
Q.
Statement: Should there be a common foundation course in the first year, regardless of the discipline, for all the science students?
Arguments:
Arguments:
I. Yes; the success rate of the science students is quite lower that of arts students.
II. Yes; the move will facilitate students to switch discipline after the first year.
II. Yes; the move will facilitate students to switch discipline after the first year.
a)
If only argument I is “strong”.
b)
If only argument II is “strong”.
c)
If neither I nor II is “strong”.
d)
If both I and II are “strong”.
|
Nishant Upadhyay answered |
The answer is B because
The statement I is just incorrect because the success rate of arts is out of scope and has nothing to do here.
Statement II is strong because if we have a common foundation course any student can identify his/her preference of course easily.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the sale of all the toys made in China be banned in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, these are very cheap and hence will put the local toy manufacturers out of business.
II. No, Indian toys are of much better quality and their sale will not be affected.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should the sale of all the toys made in China be banned in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, these are very cheap and hence will put the local toy manufacturers out of business.
II. No, Indian toys are of much better quality and their sale will not be affected.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
Kabeer ghosh answered |
The correct option is E.
Both the arguments are correct in their aspects.
As an argument I say, Yes these are very cheap and hence will put the local toy manufacturers out of business, this statement is absolutely correct.
Argument II says ‘No, Indian toys are of much better quality and their sale will not be affected’, this statement is also correct.
Both the arguments are correct in their aspects.
As an argument I say, Yes these are very cheap and hence will put the local toy manufacturers out of business, this statement is absolutely correct.
Argument II says ‘No, Indian toys are of much better quality and their sale will not be affected’, this statement is also correct.
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should Indian scientists working abroad be called back to India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, they must serve the motherland first and forget about discoveries, honours, facilities and all.
II. No, we have enough talent, let them stay where they want.
- a)if only argument I is strong
- b)if only argument II is strong.
- c)if either argument I or II is strong.
- d)if neither argument I nor II is strong.
- e)if both arguments I and II are strong
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Directions: In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to distinguish between a 'strong' argument and a 'weak' argument. A 'strong' argument must be both important and directly related to the question. A 'weak' argument may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspect of the question. The question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is 'strong' and which is 'weak'.
Statement: Should Indian scientists working abroad be called back to India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, they must serve the motherland first and forget about discoveries, honours, facilities and all.
II. No, we have enough talent, let them stay where they want.
a)
if only argument I is strong
b)
if only argument II is strong.
c)
if either argument I or II is strong.
d)
if neither argument I nor II is strong.
e)
if both arguments I and II are strong
|
|
EduRev CLAT answered |
Clearly, every person must be free to work wherever he wants and no compulsion should be made to confine one to one's own country. So, argument I is vague. However, talented scientists can be of great benefit to the nation and some alternatives as special incentives or better prospects may be made available to them to retain them within their motherland. So, argument II also does not hold.
Chapter doubts & questions for Strong & Weak Arguments - 4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG 2025 is part of CLAT exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Strong & Weak Arguments - 4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG in English & Hindi are available as part of CLAT exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
4 Months Preparation Course for CLAT UG
283 videos|1003 docs|331 tests
|
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up
within 7 days!
within 7 days!
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup