Statement–Argument — Should parents play with their children? Arguments: I) Yes; it builds healthy and much-needed companionship between children and parents. II) No; children then treat parents like equals and distance is lost. Choose the strong argument(s).
-
Aif only Argument I is strong
-
Bif only Argument II is strong
-
Cif either I or II is strong
-
Dif neither I nor II is strong
-
ENone of these
Answer
Correct Answer: if only Argument I is strong
Explanation
Introduction / Context:Parental engagement is often linked to better bonding and development. Strong arguments should connect to these outcomes rather than conjectural fears about “lost distance.”
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Play fosters trust, communication, and socio-emotional learning.
- Authority and boundaries can coexist with warmth and play.
- Loss of respect is not a necessary consequence of play.
Concept / Approach:Argument I directly cites companionship as a developmental and relational benefit—specific and relevant. Argument II predicts a negative effect (lost distance/respect) without necessity or mechanism; boundaries can be maintained through consistent parenting, so it is weak.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I: Strong—supports the statement with clear relational benefits.II: Weak—unsupported universal risk; confuses warmth with loss of authority.Verification / Alternative check:Many parenting frameworks encourage guided play while preserving roles, supporting I and undermining II’s inevitability claim.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Either” would treat II as strong; “Neither” ignores I’s strength.
Common Pitfalls:Assuming affection undermines authority rather than complementing it.
Final Answer:if only Argument I is strong.