Statment Are nuclear families better than joint families? Argument I. No joint familes enssure security aand aalsso reduce the burden of work. II. Yes Nuclear families ensure greater freedom.

if only argument I is strong
i only argument II are strong
if either I or II is strong
i neither I nor II is strong aand

Correct Answer:

Explanation:

Clearly with so many people around in joint family, thhere is more security. Also work is shared. So argument I holds. In nuclear families there are lesser number of people and so lesser responsibilities and more freedom. Thus, II also holds.

← Previous Question Next Question→

More Questions from Statement and Argument

Statement : Should there be concentration of foreign investment in only few states? Argument : I. No. It is against the policy of overall development of the country. II. Yes. A large number of states lack infrastructure to attract foreign investment.
Statement : Should India engage into a dialogue with neighboring countries to stop cross border tension? Argument: I. Yes. This is the only way to reduce the cross border terrorism and stop loss of innocent lives. II. No. Neighboring countries cannot be relied upon in such matters, they may still engage in subversive activities.
Statement: Should system of offering jobs only to the wards of government employees be introduced in all government offices in India? Argument: I. No. It denies opportunity to many deserving individuals and government may stand to lose in the long run. II. No. It is against the principle of equality. Does not government owe its responsibility to all its citizens?
Statement: Should the sex determination test during pregnancy be completely banned? Arguments: I. Yes. This leads to indiscriminate female feticide and eventually will lead to social imbalance. II. No. People have a right to know about their unborn child.
Statement: Should there be only one rate of interest nor term deposits of varying durations in banks? Arguments: I. No, People will refrain from keeping money for longer duration resulting into reduction of liquidity level of banks. II Yes. This will be much simple for the common people and they may be encouraged to keep more money in banks.
Statement: Should all refugees, who make unauthorized entry into a country, be forced to go back to their homeland? Arguments: I. Yes, they leave their colonies and occupy a lot of land. II. No. they leave their homes because of hanger or some terror and on human grounds, should not be forced to go back.
Statement: Should the oil companies be allowed to fix the price of petroleum products depending on market conditions? Arguments: I. Yes. This is the only way to make the oil companies commercially viable. II. No. This will put additional burden on the retail prices of essential commodities and will cause a lot of hardships to the masses.
Statement: Should there be a maximum limit for the number of ministers in the Central government? Arguments: I. No. The political party in power should have the freedom to decide the number of ministers to be appointed. II. Yes. The number of ministers should be restricted to a certain percentage of the total number of seats in the parliament to avoid unnecessary expenditure.
Statement: Should non - non vegetarian food be totally banned in our country? Arguments: I. Yes. It is expensive and therefor it is beyond the means of most people in our country. II. No. Nothing should be banned in a democratic country like ours.
Statement: Should Indian become a permanent member of 'UN' s security Council? Arguments: I. Yes. India has emerged as a country which loves peace and amity II. No. let us first solve problems of our own people like poverty, malnutrition.

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

Join Discussion