The question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument. Statement: Should the RBI lift the ban on the BOB World app? Arguments: I. Yes, lifting the ban promotes financial inclusion, but it may also risk exposing users to potential security threats. II. No, maintaining the ban ensures financial security and protects users from potential fraudulent activities and data breaches.

### Concept & Logic A "strong" argument must be directly related to the statement, logically sound, and decisive. Ambivalent or contradictory arguments are considered "weak". ### Step-by-Step Solution * **Analyze Argument I:** This argument starts by supporting the lifting of the ban for "financial inclusion" but immediately undermines its own stance by stating "but it may also risk exposing users to potential security threats." Because it is hesitant and contradictory, it fails to make a decisive point. Therefore, Argument I is weak. * **Analyze Argument II:** This argument provides a clear, logical, and firm reason for maintaining the ban: ensuring financial security and protecting users from fraud and data breaches. This is a primary responsibility of regulatory bodies like the RBI. Therefore, Argument II is strong. * **Conclusion:** Only the second argument holds up logically without contradicting itself. ### Exam Strategy & Shortcut Arguments containing words like "but", "might", or presenting both pros and cons within the same point are almost always weak because they lack conviction. You can quickly eliminate Argument I based on this structural flaw. ### Common Pitfall Mistaking a balanced view for a "strong" argument. In this specific question format, an argument must pick a side and defend it resolutely to be considered strong. ### Final Answer Therefore, the correct answer is **If only II is strong**.