Critical reasoning – Should luxury hotels be banned in India? Statement: “Should luxury hotels be banned in India?” Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. They are places from where international criminals operate. II. No. Affluent foreign tourists will have.

Question

Solve this multiple-choice question and choose the correct option.

Curioustab · Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context:We must evaluate policy arguments about banning luxury hotels. A strong argument should be realistic, non-extreme, and directly relevant to the stated policy. Given Data / Assumptions: Luxury hospitality supports tourism, conferences, and foreign exchange earnings. Argument I generalizes hotels as hubs for international criminals. Argument II highlights the need for accommodation for affluent tourists. Concept / Approach:Public safety is crucial, but it is normally addressed via enforcement, not blanket bans. Tourism infrastructure is a legitimate economic need. Step-by-Step Solution: Argument I: Overgeneralized and unsupported. Criminal misuse can occur anywhere; the remedy is better security, KYC, and law enforcement, not abolition of an industry segment. Weak.Argument II: Reasonable and pragmatic. Banning luxury hotels removes legitimate accommodation for visitors and harms tourism and jobs. Strong. Verification / Alternative check: Global practice targets crime through regulation and policing; hospitality sectors are regulated, not banned. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Only I strong / Either / Neither / Both: These either endorse an extreme unsupported claim or ignore the economic rationale. Common Pitfalls: Equating misuse by a few with an inherent defect of the facility type. Final Answer:Only argument II is strong

Critical reasoning – Should luxury hotels be banned in India? Statement: “Should luxury hotels be banned in India?” Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. They are places from where international criminals operate. II. No. Affluent foreign tourists will have no place to stay.

Answer

Explanation