Both the argument are strong.
Argument I is strong because insurance is meant to cover the risk and promotes savings. Argument II lacks clear logic.
Argument I is strong because a close companionship bridges the gap between parents and children. Arguments II is not supported by a positive logical aspect of the statement and hence, is weak argument.
Argument II is strong as cottage industries will definitely solve the problem of unemployment in rural areas. Argument I is not logical.
Both the arguments are not strong because both the arguments do not contain any logical.
If poor children are loved, cared for and provided with comforts of life, they will definitely respond strongly and positively in terms of respect of their parents. Argument II is not strong.
The second argument that the number of questions to be answered is always very large is very generalised. But the first argument that the assessment of objective test is reliable is a strong argument.
Arguments I and III are strong. Education is meant for both knowledge and securing a job.
None of the argument stated provides the strong and convincing reason to support or to oppose the statement given.
Only Argument III is strong because we can seek any job for which we qualify and stopping and individual from doing this will go against the basic rights of the individual.
Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.