Discussion
Home ‣ Verbal Reasoning ‣ Statement and Argument Comments
- Question
- 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
- Correct Answer
- if only argument II is strong
ExplanationI 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.
- 1. 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
- 2. 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
- 3. 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
- 4. 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
- 5. 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 Discuss
- 6. Statement :
Should students be banned from carrying mobile phones in college campuses?
Arguments:
I. No, mobile phone has become essential for an individual and one needs to keep to all day.
II. Yes, mobile phones district students from studies.
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 Parliamentary and Assembly elections in India be clubbed together?
Arguments:
I. Yes, it will bring down the costs of conducting the elections.
II. No, our country consists of a large number of illiterate voters who lack sufficient ability to carry these two responsibilities together and this in the long run will jeopardise our democracy.
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 films based on ghosts be banned?
Arguments:
I. No, film-making is an absolute art.
II. Yes, it helps increase superstition.
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 :
Railways should introduce conductors (like those in the buses ) for selling tickets on running trains.
Arguments:
I. Yes, that would reduce the number of ticketless passengers significantly.
II. No, that would unnecessarily complicate the procedure and increase cost as the salaries to the conductors would be much more then those in the existing system.
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 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.
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 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:
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 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: 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:
I 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.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
Argument I is weak because it says virtually nothing. II is strong because distraction from studies is not desirable.
Correct Answer: if only argument I is strong
Explanation:
Argument I is strong because cost-cutting is desirable, II is weak because illiteracy and lack of ability will be as much an impediment in a combined election as in separate elections.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
Argument I is weak because it is vague. II is strong because superstition is not desirable.
Correct Answer: if either I or II is strong
Explanation:
Sometimes people in hurry prefer catching the train although they have no intention to travel without paying . Such people will buy ticket. So I is strong . Revenue earning could be more than that of existing system. Which may supersede the extra costs. So II may not be strong.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
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.
Comments
There are no comments.More in Verbal Reasoning:
Programming
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.