As I is weak because it Superfluous, it dose not go into the reason for population control. II. Is an argument by example and hence weak.
I is strong because only police verification can ensure the past background and intentions of these foreign visitors. II is a weak argument. Every law can abused. So should we do away with laws?
I is strong because it goes into reason. II is a weak argument because it is obsessed with the false notion that change in allocation puts a burden on the budget.
I is not strong because it is not pinpointing the core issue and stresses on the disadvantage of rally in general. II is weak because it is too simplistic and does not have argumentative substance.
Only I is strong because it will reduce the cases of defection and the wrong way to gain a majority . II is not strong because restriction of the number of ministers does not imply that there wii be less number of ministers than required.
Only I is strong. II is not strong because State Government can 't be compared with Central Government.
I is strong because female foeticide is undesirable. II is weak.
I is weak because it is not relevant to "complete ban". II is a strong argument because banning mining in such a scenario will lead us into great trouble.
I is strong as improved ambience is desirable.
II is strong because regimentation of adults is undesirable.
I is strong as growth of the economy is desirable. II is not strong because Saturdays and Sundays are meant for this very intermitten rest. This purpose is not served by holidays.
I is strong because it is desirable to help the needy students. II is also strong because compromising on quality takes away from the purpose of education.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.