Home » Logical Reasoning » Statement and Argument

Should government stop spending huge amounts of money on international sports ? Arguments : I. Yes. This money can be utilised for poor. II. No. Sports-persons will be frustrated and will not get international exposure.

Only argument I is strong
Only argument II is strong
Neither I nor II is strong
Both I and II are strong

Correct Answer: Only argument II is strong

Explanation:

Clearly spending money on sports can not be avoided merely for social economic problems. But Argument II is strong. Be a sports man and then think on this question.

← Previous Question Next Question→

More Questions from Statement and Argument

A statement is given followed by three inferences numbered I, II, and III. Consider the statement to be true even if it is at variance with commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the inferences, if any, follow from the given statement. Statement: Japan will open up its doors to about two lakh IT professionals from India, and issue green cards to settle down in Japan and support the country's rapidly expanding IT infrastructure, said Shigeki Maeda, Executive Vice President at Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO), a government body. Inferences: I. There is a dearth of IT professionals in Japan. II. IT professionals from India are way more talented and hardworking than professionals from other countries. III. Japan’s IT industry is growing by leaps and bounds every year.
A statement is followed by two arguments. Decide which of the arguments is/are strong with respect to the statement. Statement: Should too much revealing dress be banned? Argument: 1. Yes, it disturbs the people and create abuse. 2. No, wearing cloths of their choice is the fundamental right of the individual
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments numbered I & II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument. Statement: Is global warming a real threat? Arguments : I. Yes, it is a threat leading to the consequences of sea level rise, extreme heat, heightened wildfire risk, and drought and other water supply issues. II. No, Global warming is a misconception created by some people.
A statement is followed by two arguments. Decide which of the arguments is/are strong with respect to the statement. Statement: From tender age children must be trained to do household chores. Arguments: I. Yes, it will make them grow responsible for their work. II. No, it is enough that we send them to school as they learn everything there.
Read the statement below followed by two arguments. Statement: Should there be strict laws for maintaining ponds and lakes? Arguments: I. Yes, it will naturally maintain the water level for generations to come. It affects the migration of birds too. II. No, it comes in the way of modern urban development and growth. Which argument(s) of the below is/are strong in the context of the statement?
Given is a statement followed by two arguments numbered I and II. Consider the statement and the arguments and decide which of the arguments is strong. Statement: Is the choice of junk food a better option to create interest in eating in children? Arguments: I. Yes, the best way to create interest is to give the food a child likes. II. No. junk food is the reason behind obesity, heart diseases, diabetes and other health problems and it is important to induce healthy eating habits in children.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement : Should one year of army training be compulsory for all Indian citizens? Argument I : No, the costs of training will be prohibitive and one year of labour will be lost. Argument II : Yes, army training helps make better citizens.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement : Should street lights be switched off after midnight? Argument I : No, statistics show that crime and accidents increase if street lights are switched off. Argument II : Yes, few vehicles ply after midnight, expensive electricity will be wasted.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement : Should Chinese crackers be banned? Argument I : No, China will be hurt by this decision. Argument II : Yes, crackers kill insects.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement : Should songs be eliminated from Indian movies. Argument I : Yes, Hollywood movies are hit despite having no songs. Argument II : No, songs help increase length of the movie.

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

Join Discussion