Practice Questions: Strong & Weak Arguments | Logical Reasoning for CLAT PDF Download

Direction: Remember, in Statement and Assumptions/Arguments questions, you have to evaluate whether the assumptions are implicit in the given statement or arguments fall in place with the statements.

Q1: Statement: The company will introduce a new line of organic skincare products.
Assumptions:

1. The company has conducted market research to identify potential customers for the new products.
2. There is a market demand for organic skincare products.

Ans: (2)

Explanation: Assumption 2 is implicit because introducing a new product line normally presupposes that there is sufficient demand or expected demand for that type of product; otherwise launching the line would be unjustified. Assumption 1 is not necessarily implicit: the company may decide to launch the line based on strategy, branding, or competitive reasons without having conducted formal market research. Thus only assumption 2 is reasonably taken for granted.

Q2: Statement: The city's public transportation system will be expanded with new routes and increased frequency.
Assumptions:

1. There is a demand for more public transportation options in the city.
2. The city's population is expected to increase in the near future.

Ans: (1)

Explanation: Assumption 1 is implicit because expansion with more routes and higher frequency presumes current or foreseeable demand for those services. Assumption 2 is not essential: expansion can be motivated by factors other than population growth (for example, to reduce congestion, improve connectivity, or shift commuters from private vehicles). Therefore only assumption 1 is clearly presupposed.

Q3: Statement: The university's new online learning platform aims to reach a wider range of students.
Assumptions:

1. Students prefer online platforms over traditional classroom learning.
2. There is a demand for online education among students.

Ans: (2)

Explanation: Assumption 2 is implicit because a platform intended to reach a wider range of students presumes existing or potential demand for online education. Assumption 1 is not implicit: aiming to reach more students does not require that students generally prefer online learning; they may prefer classroom teaching but still welcome additional online options for flexibility. Hence only assumption 2 follows.

Q4: Statement: Only individuals above the age of 18 are allowed to participate in the competition.
Assumptions:

1. Participants below the age of 18 may not have the required skills for the competition.
2. The competition organizers want to ensure fair and mature participation.

Ans: (1)

Explanation: Assumption 1 is implicit because setting an age minimum usually rests on the belief that younger persons may lack required skills, experience or maturity for the event. Assumption 2 refers to the organisers' motive; it is speculative rather than strictly presupposed by the rule. The age restriction could be for many reasons, so only assumption 1 is directly taken for granted.

Q5: Statement: Due to a recent increase in traffic accidents, the government plans to implement stricter traffic regulations.
Assumptions:

1. Stricter traffic regulations will lead to a reduction in traffic accidents.
2. The current traffic regulations are not effectively preventing accidents.

Ans: (1)

Explanation: Assumption 1 is implicit because the decision to make regulations stricter presumes that tougher rules will help reduce accidents. Assumption 2 is not necessarily implicit: the government may decide to strengthen rules even if current regulations are adequate but not fully enforced, or to address new risk factors. The key presupposition is that stricter rules will have the desired effect.

Q6: Statement: Should India adopt a bi-party system instead of a multi-party system?
Arguments: 
I. No. It would undermine the diversity of the country.
II. Yes. All coalition governments are weak and indecisive.

(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.
Ans: (a)

Explanation: Argument I is strong because a bi-party system tends to reduce representation of diverse social, regional and ideological groups; in a country as diverse as India this is a serious and relevant concern. Argument II is weak because it overgeneralises: coalition governments can be effective and decisive in many situations, so claiming that all coalitions are weak is not a reliable basis for preferring a bi-party system.

Q7: Statement: Should paparazzis who take pictures of the children of celebrities be criminally prosecuted?
Arguments: 
I. Yes. These people violate the rights of privacy of the kids.
II. No. These people are just doing their jobs and following the orders of their superiors.

(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.
Ans: (d)

Explanation: Argument I is strong because photographing children of public figures raises clear privacy and child-welfare concerns, which can justify criminal sanctions. Argument II is also a relevant consideration: criminal prosecution may have practical consequences for journalists and photographers who act under employer instructions, raising questions about fairness and the scope of liability. Both arguments address important and different aspects of the issue, so both are considered strong.

Q8: Statement: Should e-waste management by recycling of old electronic devices be promoted?
Arguments:
I. No. It would prevent people from purchasing unnecessary devices.
II. Yes. It would greatly prevent environmental degradation.

(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.
Ans: (a)

Explanation: Argument I is strong in that wider recycling and refurbishment can reduce demand for new devices, thereby discouraging unnecessary purchases and lowering consumption. Argument II is stated too strongly: while recycling helps reduce environmental harm, saying it would "greatly prevent environmental degradation" is an overgeneralisation because effective e-waste management requires proper collection, processing and complementary policies; recycling alone may not be a complete solution. Hence only argument I is judged as the stronger and more directly supported point.

Q9: Statement: Should research in the field of artificial intelligence be stopped?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It increases human dependency on machines.
II. No. It would stop human evolution.

(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.
Ans: (c)

Explanation: Argument I is weak as a reason to stop all AI research: while increased dependency is a concern, it does not by itself justify halting research; regulation or safeguards are more appropriate responses. Argument II is also weak and speculative: stopping AI research would not "stop human evolution," and the term is misapplied here. Neither argument provides a strong, decisive reason for the stated action.