Statement: Should there be an amendment in the acts related to check-bouncing? Arguments: I. Yes, Existing laws are not sufficient in curbing the incidents related to check-bouncing. II. Yes. This will lessen the miseries of entrepreneurs due to increase in number of incidents of delay in payment and problems related to check-bouncing.

if only argument I is strong
if only argument II is strong
if either I or II is strong
if neither I nor II is strong

Correct Answer: if only argument II is strong

Explanation:

I is weak because ''amendment'' itself implies that the existing laws are not sufficient. There is no addition to what has been said in the statement. II is strong because the miseries of the entrepreneurs are certainly not desirable.

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

More Questions from Statement and Argument

Discussion & Comments