Statement–Argument (Campus Politics): Statement: Should political activity on campus be restrained? Arguments: I) Yes, excessive politics vitiates the academic atmosphere. II) No, restraint impinges on students’ freedom. Choose the option indicating which argument is strong.

Introduction / Context:
Universities must balance free expression/association with an academic mission. Both sides can present strong, principle-grounded arguments: educational focus versus civil liberties.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Argument I: Asserts that high political intensity disrupts learning—discipline, classes, and safety.
• Argument II: Warns that restraining politics curtails students’ rights to speech/association.

Concept / Approach:
Both arguments map to recognised institutional values. I is strong where disruption is material; II is strong where freedoms are core and can coexist with study through reasonable time-place-manner rules.

Step-by-Step Solution:
I focuses on academic outcomes and campus order—relevant and concrete.II focuses on rights and democratic learning—also relevant and concrete.Since each stands on an independent principle, either can be strong depending on context.

Verification / Alternative check:
Most campuses adopt calibrated rules (venue/time limits) to reconcile both objectives, evidencing dual legitimacy.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Choosing only one side ignores the legitimate counter-principle; “neither” denies obvious stakes.

Common Pitfalls:
All-or-nothing framing; overlooking moderate regulation that respects speech and study.

Final Answer:
if either I or II is strong.