Direction: In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ''Strong'' arguments and ''Weak'' arguments insofar 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.
-
Statement:
Three million tonnes of foodgrains vanished from the Food Corporation of India granaries. Should the officials of the FCL explain it to the people?
Arguments:
I. No. Such losses are a routine matter and therefore do not beg an explanation.
II. Yes. Bungling on such a large scale by publicofficials cannot be condoned; after all it is the people's loss.
-
- if only argument I is strong.
- if only argument II is strong.
- If either I or II is strong.
- if neither I nor II is strong; and
- if both I and II are strong.
Correct Option: B
Dismissing the losses as ''a routine matter'' is void of logic. If such losses have become regular, there is all the more reason why they need to be explained. So I is weak. II is strong; accountability is at stake.
