Question Description
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? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about 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? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for 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?.

Solutions for 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? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of 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? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of 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?, a detailed solution for 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? has been provided alongside types of 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? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice 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? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.