Arguments I is not the right way. Thus, Argument I s weak Arguments II is strong as upliftment of socially backward classes is necessary.
Argument I is strong but Arguments II is simplistic and hence, it is a weak argument.
Arguments I and II both are strong. The high salary of executives in multinational companies would definitely create unhealthy competition and consequently our companies which are not rich will be in difficulties. Secondly, such ceiling will discourage multinationals to take interest in our economy and encourage our companies.
Both the arguments are ambiguous and not supported by a clear cut logic. Hence, both are weak.
Argument I is strong as reduced tobacco consumption is desirable. Arguments II is weak as such convenience is not desirable.
Arguments I is weak as it is an argument by example. Arguments II is weak because it is rubbish. In fact, it is mature having such a criteria, lesser maturity would be required when the choice is limited.
Arguments I does not establish proper relation with the statement. Argument II may be an opinion and has not been discussed in the given statement. Hence, I and II both are weak.
Argument I is strong. Fabulous prices for old master piece are demanded because of their originality and innovative hard efforts.
Both the arguments are strong because each of the arguments deals with the statement quite logically.
Arguments I is strong i.e, India should make efforts to harness solar energy to fulfill its energy requirement because most of the energy sources used at present are exhaustible. Arguments II is weak.
Logically, only Arguments I is strong
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.