Assertion–Reason (Two Reasons):\nAssertion (A): A number of activists want total prohibition on alcoholic drinks.\nReason (R1): Consuming alcohol kills people.\nReason (R2): Consumption of alcohol is very often a social ill.

Difficulty: Medium

If only reason 1 (R1) and not reason 2 (R2) is the reason for the assertion (A).
If only reason 2 (R2) and not reason 1 (R1) is the reason for the assertion (A).
If both (R1) and (R2) are reasons for the assertion (A).
If neither (R1) nor (R2) is the reason for the assertion (A).
If (R1) is partly correct and (R2) is partly correct.

Correct Answer: If only reason 2 (R2) and not reason 1 (R1) is the reason for the assertion (A).

Explanation:

Introduction / Context:
The stem asks which stated reason better explains activist demands for prohibition. We must check the factual strength and generality of (R1) and (R2) and whether they plausibly motivate calls for prohibition.

Given Data / Assumptions:

(A) Many activists argue for total prohibition.
(R1) “Consuming alcohol kills people” is an absolutist claim.
(R2) Alcohol is often linked to social ills (violence, accidents, addiction, productivity loss).

Concept / Approach:
Sound reasons should be framed without sweeping universalities. Public-health and social-order arguments typically focus on harm prevalence and externalities, not absolute fatality claims.

Step-by-Step Solution:

1) (R1) is overstated: alcohol consumption does not inevitably kill; risk depends on dose, pattern, and context.2) (R2) aligns with well-documented social harms—domestic violence, road injuries, absenteeism, community disorder—which frequently anchor prohibition demands.3) Therefore, (R2) is a valid explanatory reason, (R1) is not.

Verification / Alternative check:
Policy debates typically cite measurable social costs and public-health data rather than absolute fatal outcomes.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(a) privileges an absolute falsehood; (c) wrongly accepts both; (d) rejects all reasons despite (R2) being sound; (e) unnecessary hedging.

Common Pitfalls:
Treating complex risk as absolute; ignoring the difference between mortality risk and broader social harms.

Final Answer:
Option B: Only (R2) explains (A).

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

Assertion–Reason (Two Reasons):\nAssertion (A): A number of activists want total prohibition on alcoholic drinks.\nReason (R1): Consuming alcohol kills people.\nReason (R2): Consumption of alcohol is very often a social ill.

More Questions from Assertion and Reason

Discussion & Comments