Statement and Argument
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:
Should Company X be allowed to merge with Company Y?
Arguments:
I. Yes, The merger of Hindustan Lever with Lipton was a success.
II. No. A merger affects the morale of the employees of the company which has to play second fiddle in the merger.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
I is a weak argument because such an argument based on a single example may be deceptive. It is possible that the arguer is not taking into account several other mergers which have proved to be failures. II is strong because it presents a genuine disadvantage.
Correct Option: B
I is a weak argument because such an argument based on a single example may be deceptive. It is possible that the arguer is not taking into account several other mergers which have proved to be failures. II is strong because it presents a genuine disadvantage.
- Statement:
Should communal violence be allowed on television ?
Arguments:
I. Yes, It is only when we see the devil within us that we can exorcise it.
II. No, It leads to tensions in actual life.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
I is strong. Literature and media are often hailed as mirrors of life. If the mirrors doesn't show the dirt on your face, it would be difficult to wipe it clean. II is also strong : there are many such instances.
Correct Option: E
I is strong. Literature and media are often hailed as mirrors of life. If the mirrors doesn't show the dirt on your face, it would be difficult to wipe it clean. II is also strong : there are many such instances.
- Statement:
Should political activity on the campus be restrained?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Too much of politics vitiates the academic atmosphere.
II. No. It will be an impingement on the students 'right to freedom.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
if only argument I is strong
Correct Option: A
if only argument I is strong
- Statement:
Should voting be made compulsory for all adults?
Arguments:
I. Yes. The candidates then elected would be far more representational.
II. No. The citizens would thereby lose the right to not choose a representative.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
I is strong: the more the number of voters, the better the representation. II is also strong if the concept of voting is seen analytically. When you vote, you decide to be with someone. Now, it is not necessary that you must be with someone. Such a compulsion would be going against the democratic principal .
Correct Option: E
I is strong: the more the number of voters, the better the representation. II is also strong if the concept of voting is seen analytically. When you vote, you decide to be with someone. Now, it is not necessary that you must be with someone. Such a compulsion would be going against the democratic principal .
- Statement:
Should subsidy on domestic LPG cylinders be stopped?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It leads to misuse of LPG by housewives who over- cook their food.
II. No. Any subsidy cannot be stopped in a country committed to social welfare.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
I is not only a weak argument but absurd! Which house-wife would want to spoil her food by over- cooking it? II is also a weak argument: commitment to social welfare dose not imply blind carrying on of subsidies. The necessity of subsidies needs to be revised from time to time on a case-by -case basis.
Correct Option: D
I is not only a weak argument but absurd! Which house-wife would want to spoil her food by over- cooking it? II is also a weak argument: commitment to social welfare dose not imply blind carrying on of subsidies. The necessity of subsidies needs to be revised from time to time on a case-by -case basis.