Discussion
Home ‣ Verbal Reasoning ‣ Statement and Argument Comments
- Question
- Statement:
Should there be a law against superstition in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, it is a belief in magical and similar influences, in idea or practice based on this.
II. No, it has been recognised by our forefathers and has a strong base in our society.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and
- Correct Answer
- if neither I nor II is strong; and
ExplanationI is not an argument. It defines superstition. Hence, I is not strong. II is not strong because it obsessed with the wrong assumption that a belief which prevails in our society deeply needs no intervention of law.
- 1. Statement:
Should the Indian Railways be corporatised?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the move will make it an autonomous entity, which will bring in enormous changes like quick decision-making .
II. No, it is futile unless we put an end to the handling of archaic rules in the appointment of favourites to the top positions.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and Discuss
- 2. Statement:
Should India make it compulsory to sterilise every woman going for second delivery?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this is the only way to reduce the growth rate of population at faster pace.
II. No, it will be a cruel act against nature.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong Discuss
- 3. Statement:
Should the Centre consult the government of a state before deploying the army in its territory for the maintenance of law and order?
Arguments:
I. Yes, if the state government is taken into confidence, the purpose of deploying the army will be more meaningful.
II. No, the Centre occupies position above the states and enjoys more power than the states.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and Discuss
- 4. Statement:
Should funds for social justice and empowerment be released to the NGOs by Central government if state machinery fails to make requisition to the ministry concerned of the Central government?
Arguments:
I. Yes, Various NGOs have a strong base among the people and experience of utilising funds issued by the Central government though the state government.
II. No, the ministry will not be able to ascertain the works of the NGOs and will face practical problems.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong Discuss
- 5. Statement:
Should the sole evidence of a rape victim be supposed enough to prove the guilt?
Arguments:
I. Yes, rape is a heinous offence.
II. No, the move will increase the chances of conviction of innocent persons.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong Discuss
- 6. Statement:
Should there be death punishment for those who are involved in manufacturing spurious drugs?
Arguments:
I. Yes, mass murder for the sake of profit should be treated only by one law -death penalty.
II. No, the main objective of the punishment is to bring reform in a convicted person by punishing him/her.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and Discuss
- 7. Statement:
Should companies' donation to political parties be banned in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, it was banned during 1969 and 1985 also.
II. No, donation to political parties is not a new thing in the country and has been in existence right from 1956.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and Discuss
- 8. Statement:
Should there be uniform civil code in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, many personal laws relating to marriage, inheritance, guardianship, divorce, maintenance and property relations in all communities are unjust, especially unjust to women.
II. No, India has a rich cultural mosaic and any artificial singularity, sought to be achieved through a common civil code, would only make the society more fragmented.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and Discuss
- 9. Statement:
Should all Mig-21 fighters be banned owing to frequent accidents of this aircraft?
Arguments:
I. Yes, it has become flying coffin.
II. No, almost all the accidents were due to human error.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and Discuss
- 10. Statement:
Should MNCs be allowed to start 100% owned subsidiaries in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, our neighbours have permitted.
II. No, India 's entrepreneurial system needs protection.
Options- A. if only argument I is strong
- B. if only argument II is strong
- C. if either I or II is strong
- D. if neither I nor II is strong; and Discuss
Statement and Argument problems
Search Results
Correct Answer: if only argument I is strong
Explanation:
I is true and the new entity will give a new shape to the performance of the Indian Railways. Hence, I is strong. II is not strong because the argument rembles into concerns other than corporatisation.
Correct Answer: if neither I nor II is strong
Explanation:
I is not strong because of the word 'only'. II is weak because it is against sterilisation. In the era of science and technology such argument is not considered as an important one .
Correct Answer: if neither I nor II is strong; and
Explanation:
I is weak because it is vague. II is strong because it is not a right way of arguing and is based on wrong assumption.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is strong because it will give lesson to erring states and will pave the way for the Central government to deal directly with NGOs. II is also strong because it will be difficult for the ministry to keep a watchful eye on the utilisation of funds released to NGOs, as a result of which cases of embezzlement may increase.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
I is not strong because it does not give sufficient reason. II is strong because it states a genuine concern.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
Not all spurious drugs lead to mass murder. So we cannot assume I to be true. Hence I is weak. II is strong because death sentence is self-defeating. If one dies, how can one be reformed?
Correct Answer: if neither I nor II is strong; and
Explanation:
Both I and II are weak arguments. I merely mentions the two occasions when the donation was banned. It does not pinpoint the core issue. II merely mentions the year from when the donation exists. It adds no argumentative substance in support of 'No'.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is strong because it will bring some reform in our society and help ensure justice for women. II is strong because it will ruin the cultural identity and abet disharmony in society.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
Argument I lacks substance and is hence weak. That it is a ''flying coffin'' is evident from the statement itself. II is strong because it makes no sense to ban the aircraft when the responsibility lies somewhere else.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
I is an absurd argument. It is not necessary that what fits others will fit us. II is a strong argument. India has to balance the competitive environment with some protection to domestic entrepreneurs. Even developed countries change their laws to protect their entrepreneurs.
Comments
There are no comments.More in Verbal Reasoning:
Programming
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.