Statement: Should individuals or industries that hold treasures of national significance, such as Nobel Prizes or similar awards, hand them over to the central government for safe custody? Arguments: 1. Yes. They do not have enough resources to protect such treasures securely. 2. No. These are the properties of the individuals or industries who win them, so they should remain in their custody.

Introduction / Context:
This statement-and-argument question is about who should safeguard items of national importance, such as Nobel Prize medals or other major awards. One argument emphasises better security under central government control, while the other stresses individual ownership rights. We need to assess whether each argument is strong, meaning relevant, realistic and significant to the decision.

Given Data / Assumptions:

Statement: Should individuals or industries having treasures of national significance hand them over to the central government for safe custody?
Argument 1: Yes. They do not have enough resources to protect them properly.
Argument 2: No. These items belong to the individuals or industries that won them, so they should remain in their custody.
Such treasures are assumed to be unique, valuable and culturally important.

Concept / Approach:
A strong argument may focus on national interest, security, fairness or legal rights. Here, Argument 1 focuses on security and resource limitations, while Argument 2 focuses on ownership and property rights. Both aspects are central to the question. When two opposing arguments are each individually reasonable, the exam usually codes the correct answer as “either 1 or 2 is strong”.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Evaluate Argument 1: It claims that individuals or companies may lack the resources needed to protect nationally significant treasures. Security for such items may require advanced systems, insurance and professional handling, which might be difficult for private parties. Since loss, theft or damage of such treasures would affect not just the owner but the nation's heritage, centralised safe custody could be justified. Hence, Argument 1 is a strong argument in favour of handing them over to the government. Evaluate Argument 2: It highlights that such treasures are legally the property of those who earned them. Property rights are a fundamental principle in most legal systems; forcibly taking such items away could be seen as unfair or a violation of those rights. Many individuals and industries may have sufficient means to protect their own assets responsibly. Therefore, Argument 2 is also a strong argument against compulsory government custody.

Verification / Alternative check:
Both arguments touch core issues: national protection of heritage and respect for private ownership. Neither is trivial or unrelated. It is entirely possible for a reasonable person to support either strong security under state care or strong property rights with voluntary arrangements for security. Thus, both arguments can be considered strong, although they support opposite answers.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Choosing only Argument 1 as strong ignores the important principle of private ownership raised by Argument 2.
Choosing only Argument 2 as strong overlooks legitimate concerns about the capability of individuals to secure high-value national treasures.
Claiming neither is strong is clearly incorrect because both arguments focus on central aspects of the issue.
Treating “both 1 and 2 are strong” as a separate code does not match the usual pattern in yes/no questions where “either 1 or 2” indicates that both are individually strong but mutually opposed.

Common Pitfalls:
Students may believe that if one argument supports national interest it automatically overrules property rights, or vice versa. In reasoning questions, however, both can be valid perspectives. The goal is not to pick a winner but to recognise when more than one side has strong, logically grounded points.

Final Answer:
Both arguments 1 and 2 are individually strong but contradict each other, so the correct choice is Either 1 or 2 is strong.