Clearly, defence is necessary for the safety of the country, which is of prime importance. So, argument I holds. Also, a country can concentrate on internal progress and development only when it is safe from external aggressions. So, argument II does not hold.
Free passes given to the railway employees is a privilage to them not their right.So 1 does'nt hold and 2 is vague
Ban is necessary to protect our natural envoirnment .So none of the argument is strong enough
A person who balances all the three healths such as Physical, mental and Social healths has the best overall health.
In such a cataclysmic scenario, the govt is likely to order the closure of offices and schools
Delinking jobs with degrees will diminish the need for higher education as amny of them persue such education for jobs.So, only arg 2 is strong
Simply saying that a thing can be abused is a simplistic argument. This applies to everything and is hence weak unless you specify the reason for abuse. Hence I is weak. II is weak because it is just not true.
As the arguments C and E states that other companies are on the losing end with this scheme, it is the only appropriate answer to this question.
Pollution at ground level is the most hazardious in the way of being injuriousto human and animal life.So,argument 1 alone holds
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.