Discussion
Home ‣ Verbal Reasoning ‣ Statement and Argument Comments
- Question
- Statement:
Should corruption-free services from the bureaucrats be made a fundamental right for the citizens of India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the move will eliminate corruption from the bureaucracy and bring happiness to the citizen.
II. No, this will give a free hand to citizens to intervene in the work of bureaucracy and discourage the bureaucrats.
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
- Correct Answer
- if only argument I is strong
Explanationif only argument I is strong
- 1. Statement:
Should there be a compulsory education till matriculation for every citizen of Indian?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Lack of education is the root cause of every evil, viz poverty, unemployment etc.
II. No. It will be a violation of human right.
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
- 2. Statement:
Should there be punishment in Indian for those who have more than two child?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It is very much desirable because there is no other way to control population growth, which is hampering the development of the country on every front.
II. Yes. If we want to a developed country like China, we should follow it.
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:
Is using Gandhi (father of the Indian nation) as a brand an insult to him?
Arguments:
I. No, if we name a road, park, street, stadium etc using the name of Gandhi, why using his name as a brand will be an insult to him?
II. Yes, it is against the National Emblems Act and any contract entered into under the Indian Contract Act which violates any Indian low is void ab initio.
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
- 4. Statement:
Is the WTO regime unfair to India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the WTO bureaucracy has been openly supporting the agenda of large capital form the developed countries, and increasingly does not even pay lip service to the genuine demands of developing countries like India.
II. No, if India cannot come up whit a consistent approach that links its domestic economic policy to its global trade strategy, why blame the WTO?
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 banks be allowed to offer different interest rates in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this is the only way to eventually lower interest rates in the country.
II. No, this will discourage the customers and they might be compelled to switch over from one bank to another.
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 a licence regime for internet services and e-commerce?
I. Yes, this will check fraud and malpractices.
II. No, any such type of step will impede progress of internet services and e-commerce in the era of globalisation and liberalisation.
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:
Would the resumption of cricketing ties contribute to normalisation of Indo-Pak relation?
Arguments:
I. No, normalisation of Indo-Pak relation needs bipartite dialogue to sort out debatable problems.
II. Yes, music , sports etc bring harmony among peoples and it is a well-known fact that sport will definitely help ensure normalization of relations.
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 private Investors be allowed to invest in defence production?
Arguments:
I. Yes. We should stress on quality. If private investors are allowed to invest in defence production, a competition for good quality will arise among them. This will help us to harness our defence sector whit ammunitions of good quality.
II. No. It will be better to keep our defence sector under veil, otherwise it will create threat to the integrity of the nation.
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 agriculture in rural India be mechanized?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It would lead to higher production.
II. No. Many villagers would be left unemployed.
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 the educated unemployed youth be paid "unemployment allowance" by the Government?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will provide them some monetary help to either seek employment or to kickstart some 'self -employment' venture.
II. No. It will dampen their urge to do something to earn their Livelihood and thus promote idleness among the unemployed youth.
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 strong because it explains how the move is furitful for citizens. II is weak because it is based on the misinterpretation of the definition of human right.
Correct Answer: if neither I nor II is strong
Explanation:
I is weak because of the words ''no other way''. II is weak because it ignores the internal factors and circumstances of the country.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong
Explanation:
II is strong because it tells why the move is illegal. I is weak because the given analogy is not appropriate. Nor is it convincing.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is strong because being swept away by money is, unfair. II is strong because it shows why WTO can't help India in spite of being fair.
Correct Answer: if neither I nor II is strong
Explanation:
there is no relation between statement and argument so we cannot relate each other.
if neither I nor II is strong
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is strong because law and order must be given priority. II is also strong. One has to go through various hassles for obtaining licenses, which will definitely affect adversely on the growth of these services.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong.
Explanation:
International sporting events were originally conceived as a promoted of peace and harmony. Hence II is strong. I is not strong because it diverts the question form ''cricketing ties'' to ''bipartite dialogue.''.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is strong argument. It will definitely help to improve the quality of defence goods, because competition always helps to improve quality at lesser expenses. II is strong because the nation's integrity cannot be compromised.
Correct Answer: if only argument I is strong
Explanation:
Clearly, mechanization would speed up the work and increase the production. So, argument I is strong enough. Argument II is vague because mechanization will only eliminate wasteful employment not create unemployment.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
Young people, who do not get employment due to the large number of applicants in all fields, must surely be given allowance so that they can support themselves. so, arguments I is valid. However, such allowances would mar the spirit to work, in them and make them idle. So argument II also holds.
Comments
There are no comments.More in Verbal Reasoning:
Programming
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.