Discussion
Home ‣ Verbal Reasoning ‣ Statement and Argument Comments
- Question
- Statement:
Should religion be taught in our schools?
Argument:
I. No. Ours is a secular state
II. Yes. Teaching religion helps include moral values among children
III. No. How can one dream of such a step when we want the young generation to fulfill its role in the 21st century
Options- A. All are strong
- B. None is strong
- C. Only I is strong
- D. Only II is strong
- Correct Answer
- Only II is strong
ExplanationOurs is a secular state does not mean that religion and religious values should be eradicated.In fact,these inculcate moral values. So, argument II is strong. Also, teaching religion can in no way hinder the students, capability to face the challenges of the 21st century.
- 1. Statement:
Should all the students graduating in any discipline desirous of pursuing post-graduation of the subjects of their choice be allowed to enrol in the post-graduate courses?
Arguments:
I. Yes. The students are the bet judge of their capabilities and there should not be restrictions for joining post-graduate courses.
II. No. The students need to study relevant subjects in graduate courses to enrol in postgraduate course and the students must fulfill such conditions.
III. No. There are not enough institutes offering post-graduate courses which can accommodate all the graduates desirous of seeking post-graduate education of their own choice.
Options- A. None is strong
- B. Only I and II are strong
- C. All are strong
- D. Only I and III are strong Discuss
- 2. Statement:
Should admission to all professional courses be made on the basis of past academic performance rather than through entrance tests?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will be beneficial for those candidates those who reunable to bear the expenses of entrance tests.
II Yes. Many deserving candidates securing high marks in their qualifying academic examinations do not perform well on such entrance tests.
III. No. The standard of examinations and assessment conducted by different Boards and universities are not comparable and hence there is a need to conduct entrance tests to calibrate them on a common yardstick.
Options- A. Only I and II are strong
- B. Only II and III are strong
- C. Only I and III are strong
- D. Only III is strong Discuss
- 3. Statement:
Should there be complete ban on Indian professionals seeking Jobs elsewhere after getting their education in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This is the only way to sustain present rate of technological development in India.
II. No. The Indians settled abroad send huge amount of foreign exchange and this constitutes a significant part of foreign exchange reserve
III. No. The practical knowledge gained by Indians by working in other countries help India develop its economy.
Options- A. None is strong
- B. All are strong
- C. Only I and II are strong
- D. Only III is strong Discuss
- 4. Statement:
Should India immediately stop digging coal from its mines?
Arguments:
I. Yes, The present stock of coal will not last long if we continue mining at the present rate.
II. No. We do not have alternate energy source of sufficient quantity.
III. No. This will put millions of people at a disadvantage and their lives will get adversely affected and also the industry.
Options- A. Only I and II are strong
- B. Only II and III are strong
- C. Only I and III are strong
- D. All are strong Discuss
- 5. Statement:
Should tobacco production be banned in the country?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Its consumption in any from is injurious to health.
II. No. It brings money to the farmers.
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
- 6. Statement:
Should there be only few banks in place of numerous banks in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This will help secure the investor's money as these big banks will be able to withstand intermitten market related shocks.
II. No. A large number of people will lose their jobs as after the merger many employees will be redundant.
III. Yes. This will help consolidate the entire banking industry and will lead to healthy competition
Options- A. None is Strong
- B. Only I and II are strong
- C. Only II and III are strong
- D. Only I and III are strong Discuss
- 7. Statement:
Should the income be generated out of agricultural activities be taxed?
Argument:
I. No. Farmers are otherwise suffering from natural calamities and low yield coupled with low procurement price and their income should not be taxed.
II. Yes. Majority of the population is dependent on agriculture and hence their income should be taxed to augment the resources.
III. Yes. Many big farmers earn much more than the majority of the service earners and they should be taxed to remove the disparity.
Options- A. Only I is strong
- B. Only I and II are strong
- C. Only II and III are strong
- D. All are strong Discuss
- 8. Statement:
Should the rule of wearing helmet for both driver and pillion rider while driving a motor bike be enforced strictly?
Argument:
I. Yes. It is a rule and rules should be followed strictly by all.
II. No. Each individual knows how to protect his own life and it should be left to his discretion.
III. No. It does not ensure safety as only the head is protected and rest of the body is not.
IV. Yes. It is a necessity as head, being the most sensitive organ, is protected by the helmet.
Options- A. None of these
- B. Only I and III are strong
- C. Only I and IV are strong
- D. Only II and IV are strong Discuss
- 9. Statements:
Should all those who are convicted for heinous crimes like murder or rape, beyond all reasonable doubts be given capital punished or death penalty?
Arguments:
I. No. the death penalty should be given only in very rate and exceptional cases.
II. Yes. This is the only way to punish such people who take other' lives or indulge in inhuman activities
III. Yes. Such sever punishments only will make people refrain from such heinous acts and the society will be safer.
IV. No. Those who are repentant for the crime they committed should be given a chance to improve and lead a normal life.
Options- A. Only II and IV are strong
- B. All are strong
- C. Only III is strong
- D. Only II and III are strong Discuss
- 10. Statement:
Should people with educational qualification higher than the optimum requirements be debarred from seeking jobs?
Arguments:
I. No. It will further aggravate the problem of educated unemployment
II. Yes. It creates complexes among employees and affects the work adversely
III. No. This goes against the basic rights of the individuals
IV. Yes. This will increase productivity.
Options- A. Only I and II are strong
- B. All are strong
- C. Only II and IV are strong
- D. Only III is strong Discuss
Statement and Argument problems
Search Results
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
Only argument II is strong. The students cannot be enrolled in the courses just on the basis of their interests, but their compatibility with the same also matters. No, I does not hold. Besides, lack of institutes in no criteria to deny post-graduate courses to students.So, argument III also does not hold. II provides a genuine reason and thus holds strong.
Correct Answer: Only III is strong
Explanation:
Clearly, a policy to select deserving candidates cannot be abolished just because of the expenditure it entails. So, argument I does not hold. Also, students who are intelligent enough to secure good marks in academic exams have no reason not to perform well in entrance tests. So, II also does not hold. Further, the students passed out from different universities are assessed on different patterns and hence a common entrance test would put the candidates to uniform test and assessment. So, only III holds strong.
Correct Answer: None is strong
Explanation:
Clearly, none of the arguments provide a substantial reason either for or against the given statements. So, none of the arguments holds strong.
Correct Answer: Only II and III are strong
Explanation:
Though the reserves of coal are limited, yet stopping its use till alternate sources of energy have been discovered, is no solution to conserve it. So, I is not strong. It is true that we haven't till date found a renewable source of energy which is available in plenty and can substitute coal. So, II holds strong. Further, stopping coal mining would surely throw the engaged workers out of employment. So, III also holds strong.
Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong.
Explanation:
I is not strong: merely banning production will not put an end to consumption. people may import tobacco and consume it. II is strong because one has to think and re-think before banning a source of revenue.
Correct Answer: None is Strong
Explanation:
The security of the investor's money is not related to the size of the bank. Besides, even after consolidation, the number of investors, their amounts and hence the duties shall remain the same and so no employees will be redundant.Reducing the number of smaller banks will also not affect the mutual competition among the banks. Thus,none of the arguments hold strong.
Correct Answer: Only II and III are strong
Explanation:
clearly, if the income of farmers is not adequate, they cannot be brought under the net of taxation as per rules governing the Income Tax Act. So, I is not strong. Besides, a major part of the population is dependent on agriculture and such a large section, if taxed even with certain concessions, would draw in huge funds into the government coffers. Also, many big landlords with substantially high incomes from agriculture are taking undue advantage of this benefit. So, both arguments II and III hold strong.
Correct Answer: Only I and IV are strong
Explanation:
Clearly, the rule has been devised or the safety of two-wheeler riders, as majority of two-wheeler accidents result in direct fall of the rider, leading to head injury and finally death. And the objective of a rule cannot be fulfilled until it is followed by all and this required strict enforcement. Thus, both I and IV hold strong, while III does not. Besides, it is the basic duty of the Government to look after the safety of the citizens and it ought not leave it to the safety of the citizens and it ought not leave it to the direction of the individuals. So, argument II does not hold strong.
Correct Answer: Only III is strong
Explanation:
Clearly, a 'person commuting a heinous crime like murder or rape should be so punished as to set an example for other not to attempt such acts in future. So, argument III holds strong. Argument I is vague while the use of the word 'only' in argument II makes it weak. Also, it cannot be assured whether a criminal is really repentant of his acts or not, he may also exhibit so just to get rid off punishment. So, argument IV also does not hold.
Correct Answer: Only III is strong
Explanation:
The issue discussed in the statement is nowhere related to increase in unemployment, as the number of vacancies filled in will remain the same. Also in a working place, it is the performance of the individual that matters and that makes him more or less wanted, and not his educational qualifications. So, neither I or II holds strong. Besides, the needs of a job are laid down in the desired qualifications for the job. So, recruitment of more qualified people cannot augment productivity. Thus IV also does not hold strong . However, it is the right of an individual to get the post or which he fulfills the eligibility criteria, whatever be his extra merits. Hence, augment III hold strong.
Comments
There are no comments.More in Verbal Reasoning:
Programming
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.