Discussion
Home ‣ Verbal Reasoning ‣ Statement and Argument Comments
- Question
- Statement:
Should our government allow migrants from other countries to work in India?
Arguments:
I. No. Our country is poverty-ridden and comprises a large number of unemployed people. Any such step will aggravate problems of our country.
II. Yes, It is the duty of every country to pave way for livelihood for all the inhabitants, irrespective of citizenship.
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 I is strong.
ExplanationI is strong argument. As the employment opportunities in India are limited, so any share in it by foreigners will reduce the opportunities for Indians. But II is weak. It is not the duty of any country to give opportunity for work to foreigners.
- 1. Statement:
Should we allow foreign scholars to deliver lectures in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes. India is a secular state and our constitution allows every citizen exchange views as one of the fundamental rights.
II. No. Discourses delivered by foreign scholars might adversely affect our age-old existing traditional culture.
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 government doctors be brought within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act?
Arguments:
I. No, any such will endanger the life of the patient because it will impose some hindrances to the doctors in some cases in which patients are in critical condition.
II. Yes, a patient invests money in improving his/her health. He/she has full right to get required service form doctors and if he/she incurs any loss then for compensation it is necessary to bring the doctors within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act.
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 a person found guilty in a rape case be given capital punishment?
Arguments:
I. Yes, such a harsh punishment will be able to reduce grievous crimes against women. This punishment will compel atrocious persons having similar bent of mind to change their behavior.
II. No, any such step will endanger the life of the victim because the culprit might kill the victim to wipe out all the evidence .
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:
Should various State Electricity Boards conduct raids check use of ACs during peak hours?
Arguments :
I. Yes, electricity is one of the main sources of energy which facilitates people many amenities, therefore it is necessary to save electricity during peak hours.
II. No, in fact, what should really be checked is whether the person is actually exceeding the installed or the connected load than is justified and it is a common sight to see many connections running illegally form a pole to pilfer electricity.
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 scientists be allowed to go for human cloning?
Arguments:
I. Yes, human cloning is going to be a terrific way to beat diseases and will give childless couples an opportunity to have baby.
II. No, experts say that serious malformations have occurred in all species cloned so far, and it is sure it will happen in humans too. Scientists should not be allowed to meddle with nature.
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 the government hike postal rates?
Arguments:
I. No. A large number of poor people get benefits from postal facilities. Increase in postal rates will impede this weaker section to exchange views with others.
II. Yes. Government has been providing postal facility at meagre rates and incurring losses which is not good for the economy of the country.
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 a poverty-ridden country invest money in hosting international games?
Arguments:
I. Yes, international games bring many countries on a single platform and evolve co-ordination among these countries.
II. No. To host international games, a huge amount of money will be needed which will adversely affect welfare programmes aimed at eradicating poverty.
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:
Three million tonnes of foodgrains vanished from the Food Corporation of India granaries. Should the officials of the FCL explain it to the people?
Arguments:
I. No. Such losses are a routine matter and therefore do not beg an explanation.
II. Yes. Bungling on such a large scale by publicofficials cannot be condoned; after all it is the people's loss.
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:
Have the economic reforms proved effective?
Arguments:
I. Yes. There has been a tremendous improvement in the gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate.
II. No. The progress that has been made is due to the bounty of the monsoons.
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 firms give priority to getting new clients?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They offer the potential for additional future revenues.
II. No. This would hamper the service being provided to old clients.
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 neither I nor II is strong; and
Explanation:
I is weak because the constitutional provision cited here applies only to Indian citizens. II is weak because it is only a tentative proposition. Note the word might.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is strong because a doctor may have to take certain risks to save the the patient's life. II is strong because negligence should not deprive the patients of their legitimate rights.
Correct Answer: if only argument I is strong.
Explanation:
I is strong because a major reason behind any punishment is to create fear of the crime among other. II is not strong because no law works on the basis of fearing the criminal. For that matter, a criminal does not even like simple punishment. And so even when then there is no capital punishment involved, he will try to eradicate all the evidence.
Correct Answer: if only argument I is strong.
Explanation:
I is strong because ACs consume too much of electricity, creating a problem of supply for the other more necessary amenities. II is not strong: there is not so much of electricity available as to allow everyone to use his peak load capacity.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
Allowing human embryo cloning will harness the benefits of embryonic stem cells that can potentially alleviate suffering in diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's Hence I is strong .
People have witnessed serious malformation in all species cloned so far, which implies that success rate is abysmally poor. Low success rate makes argument II forceful.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
Both are strong arguments. I will hinder the poor citizens but II will minimise the loss form postal services to the government.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong.
Explanation:
I is weak because though it supports a noble cause, this has nothing to do with poverty. II is strong because affordability cannot be overlooked.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong.
Explanation:
Dismissing the losses as ''a routine matter'' is void of logic. If such losses have become regular, there is all the more reason why they need to be explained. So I is weak. II is strong; accountability is at stake.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is strong : it cites one of the prime indicators of the effectiveness of the reforms. II is also strong because good monsoons mean good agriculture. Since agriculture has a good share in our gross domestic product (GDP) and since good agriculture promotes other sectors of the economy as well, good monsoons will inevitably lead to better economic results. In that case, it is possible that the success is not that of economic reforms.
Correct Answer: if only argument I is strong.
Explanation:
I is strong because additional future revenues is a welcome prospect for any firm. II is not strong because it can not be assumed that new clients are being made at the cost of old ones.
Comments
There are no comments.More in Verbal Reasoning:
Programming
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.