Discussion
Home ‣ Verbal Reasoning ‣ Statement and Argument Comments
- Question
- Statement:
Should all the youngsters below 21 years of age be disallowed room going to a beer bar?
Argument:
I. No. it is not correct to prevent matured youngsters above 18 years of age who can vote, from having fun.
II. Yes. The entry fees to such pubs should also be hiked.
III. No. There is no such curb in western countries
IV.Yes. This will help in preventing youngsters from getting into company and imbibing bad habits
Options- A. Only I is strong
- B. Only I and II are strong
- C. Only III and IV are strong
- D. Only I and IV are strong
- Correct Answer
- Only I and IV are strong
ExplanationClearly, our constitution considers youngsters above 18 years of age, mature enough to exercise their decisive power in Government by voting. This implies that such individuals can also judge what is good or bad for them. Thus, argument I holds strong. However, at such places, youngsters may be lead astray by certain indecent guys and swayed from the right path into bad indulgences. So, IV also holds strong. Hiking the entry fees is no way to disallow them, and also the idea of imitating the western countries holds no relevance. So, neither II nor III holds strong.
- 1. Statements:
Should there be reservation of jobs in the organizations in the private sector also as in the public sector undertakings in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This would give more opportunities of development to the weaker sections of the society and thus help reduce the gap between the affluent and the downtrodden in India.
II. No. The private sector does not get any government assistance and therefore they should not be saddled with such policies.
III. No. Nowhere else in the world such a practice is being followed.
IV. No. the management of the private sector undertaking would not agree to such compulsions.
Options- A. Only I is strong
- B. Only I and II are strong
- C. Only I, II and IV are strong
- D. Only I and IV are strong Discuss
- 2. Statements:
Should class IV children have Board examination?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This will motivate the children to study and get higher marks, and thus more knowledge can be imbibed at a younger age.
II. No. The children will be forced to study and won't enjoy the process.
III. Yes. In today's competitive would the children need to be prepared right from the beginning to face such difficult examinations.
IV. No. This will add pressure on tender aged children and leave very little time or them to play.
Options- A. All are strong
- B. Only I, II and IV are strong
- C. Only II, III and IV are strong
- D. Only I and III are strong Discuss
- 3. 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
- 4. 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
- 5. 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
- 6. Statement:
Should the consumption of aerated drinks be banned in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This is the only way to reduce the risk of exposing people to some diseases
II. No. Each individual should have right to choose what he wants.
III. No. There is no confirmed evidence that such products have adverse effect on human body.
IV. Yes. It is banned inn many other countries also.
Options- A. Only I is strong
- B. Only I and II are strong
- C. Only III is strong
- D. Only I and IV are strong Discuss
- 7. Statement :
Should all the management institutes in the country be brought under government control?
Arguments :
I No. The government does not have adequate resources to run such institutes effectively.
II. No. Each institute should be given freedom to function on its own.
III. Yes. This will enable to have standardized education for all the students
IV. Yes. only then the quality of education would be improved.
Options- A. None is strong
- B. Only I, II and III are strong
- C. Only I,II and III are strong
- D. All are strong Discuss
- 8. Statement:
Should all the indirect taxes in India can be combined into a single tax on all commodities?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This will considerably simplify the tax collection mechanism and the cost of collecting tax will also reduce
II. Yes. The manufacturers and traders will be benefited by this which is turn will boost tax collection.
III. No. other country has adopted such system.
Options- A. None is strong
- B. only I and III are strong
- C. Only II is strong
- D. only II and III are strong Discuss
- 9. Should all the slums in big cities be demolished and the people living in such slums be relocated outside the city limits?
Arguments:
I. No, all these people will lose their home and livelihood and hence they should not be relocated.
II. Yes, the big cities need more and more spaces to carry out developmental activities and hence these slums should be removed.
Options- A. if only Argument I is strong.
- B. if only Argument II is Strong.
- C. if either Argument I or II is Strong.
- D. if neither Argument I or II is Strong. Discuss
- 10. Statement
Fast Track Objective Arithmetic published by 'Arihant Publication' can do wonders for those preparing for objective competitive exams, an advertisement in newspaper 'X'.
Assumptions
I. Arithmetic is asked in objective competitive exams.
II. Fast objective Arithmetic is the only book on Arithmetic published by Arihant Publication.
III. People read newspaper 'X'.
Options- A. Only Assumption III is implicit
- B. Only Assumption I is implicit
- C. Only Assumption II is implicit
- D. I and III are implicit Discuss
Statement and Argument problems
Search Results
Correct Answer: Only I is strong
Explanation:
The reservation of jobs in the private sector too would surely increase opportunities for weaker sections improve their economic plight. Thus, argument I is strong enough. Also, private sector companies work on a good profit margin and they can and will have to accommodate such a policy if implemented. So, neither II nor IV holds strong. Further, just imitating other countries holds no relevance. So, argument III also does not hold.
Correct Answer: Only II, III and IV are strong
Explanation:
Young children of class IV ought to be taught the basic fundamentals of subjects in a gradual process via practical examples and practice in a playful manner. They need not be made to study through compulsion and their age is not such as to bear the tension and their age is not such as to bear the tension and burden of examinations. So, both II and IV hold strong. However, facing examinations at this stage shall prepare them to tackle the competitions in later life. So, III also hold. However, holding examinations cannot motivate such young and immature students, neither is it a way to make them learn more. So, i does not holds strong.
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.
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 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:
The use of 'only' in I makes it invalid. Also, it is the duty of the government to save its citizens from intakes of any harmful products, even if they like them. So, II does not hold strong. Besides, a product must not be banned unless ll its harmful effect have been proved. So, III hold strong. Lastly, we cannot blindly follow the decisions taken by other countries. So, IV also does not hold.
Correct Answer: None is strong
Explanation:
Clearly, the government can pool up resources to run such institutes, if that can benefit the citizens. So, I does not hold strong. II does not provide any convincing reason. Also, it is not obligatory that government control over the institute would ensure better education than that at present. So, both III and IV also do not hold.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
Only I and II are strong. Clearly, both I and II hold strong, as they provide very convincing reasons, for a single tax system would help get rid of multifarious taxes on a product. Besides, the idea of imitation of other countries in the implementation of a certain policy holds no relevance. So, argument III does not hold strong.
Correct Answer:
Explanation:
I is true on humaterian Ground and II on economic ground.
Correct Answer: I and III are implicit
Explanation:
Assumption I is implicit as the advertisement suggests to read the given book for objective competitive exams. Assumption II is invalid because it has no relation with the given statement. Assumption III will be implicit because only then the advertisement makes sense.
Comments
There are no comments.More in Verbal Reasoning:
Programming
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.