Statement–Argument — Are nuclear families better than joint families? Arguments: I. No. Joint families provide security and distribute household responsibilities, reducing the burden on individuals. II. Yes. Nuclear families offer greater personal freedom and flexibility in decision-making.

Introduction / Context:
This is a value-comparison where “better” depends on criteria (security vs autonomy). Each argument provides a distinct, policy-relevant criterion.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I highlights security and shared responsibilities in joint families.
• II highlights autonomy and agility in nuclear families.

Concept / Approach:
When both sides supply substantial, non-trivial reasons that depend on context/preferences, either argument can be considered strong with respect to the evaluative criterion it emphasizes. Because the stem seeks a general “better,” both can be individually strong but mutually exclusive.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) I is strong: security and workload sharing are legitimate welfare criteria.2) II is strong: personal freedom and flexibility are legitimate welfare criteria.3) In such subjective trade-offs, either I or II can be accepted as a strong argument, depending on the chosen criterion.

Verification / Alternative check:
Household structure outcomes vary with income, caregiving needs, and urbanization—supporting plausibility of both sides.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I/II” ignores the opposing but valid criterion; “both” suggests simultaneous acceptance despite contradiction; the canonical key expects “either.”

Common Pitfalls:
Treating subjective criteria as universally dominant.

Final Answer:
If either I or II is strong.