Introduction / Context:
This question tests practical reasoning versus stereotype. It asks whether girls should learn martial arts such as judo and karate. The evaluation hinges on safety benefits versus a claim about “feminine grace.”
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I posits a safety benefit: self-defence skills can deter or counter physical threats.
- II asserts a negative aesthetic impact on “femininity,” a subjective and stereotyped claim.
- No evidence is presented that training reduces grace or health; conversely, martial arts often improve coordination and confidence.
Concept / Approach:
- Strong arguments are grounded in tangible outcomes and public safety considerations.
- Stereotypes or value judgments unrelated to the core objective are weak.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Argument I is strong: Defensive readiness and situational confidence are meaningful benefits for personal safety.Argument II is weak: It relies on subjective notions of “grace,” not on evidence; many practitioners maintain or enhance poise and fitness.
Verification / Alternative check:
Experience shows self-defence programs improve awareness, balance, and resilience without compromising appearance or demeanor.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only II / Both / Either / Neither: These options overlook that only I directly supports a valuable, demonstrable objective.
Common Pitfalls:
Giving weight to stereotypes instead of practical safety considerations.
Final Answer:
Only argument I is strong
Discussion & Comments