I does not tell about the bad aspect of the corporal punishment and why banning is necessary. Hence I is not strong. II is also not strong because the argument is obsessed with an inappropriate assumption that scare of corporal punishment leads a child to studies.
I is a strong argument. Keeping the same motive into consideration, FDI in print media has recently been allowed in India. II is also strong because it is true that the money and managerial power of foreigners is likely to have a negative impact on the Indian press.
I is weak because ''amendment'' itself implies that the existing laws are not sufficient. There is no addition to what has been said in the statement. II is strong because the miseries of the entrepreneurs are certainly not desirable.
Both I and II do not present any rational facts. Hence both are weak arguments.
I is strong. A right tip at the right time can reap huge dividends. II is not strong. One does not assume that going to school students will become their primary role.
II says about the need and outcome of the initiative. Hence, II is strong. But I does not say how the grievances of the people will enhance.
I is an absurd arguments. Hence it is weak. II is a strong argument because it goes into the reason behind the pension schemes. And how the move will badly effect the employee's life.
Both I and II are strong. I is strong because it is not necessary that all the rickshaw-pullers and prisoners have unsuitable bools. Hence, I stresses on the importance of bloods donation. Whereas II is strong because banning those persons from donation of blood is a good precautionary step.
The advantage shown in argument I is unlikely to be true and farfetched. But II is strong because we should not ignore our tradition.
I is strong , because it will make the financial position of hospital more strong and since user charges will be paid by the income-tax payer class, this user charge will put only a nominal burden on the budget of the class. II is a strong argument because the very reason why the state collects taxes is to provide physical and social infrastructure.
Both I and II are weak argument. I portrays a trivial aspect, hence it is weak. II is weak because it advocates for one's liberty not in a rational sense.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.