Statement and Argument Questions

• 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.
• Critical reasoning – Should shifting (slash-and-burn) agriculture be practised? Statement: “Should shifting agriculture be practised?” Arguments to evaluate: I. No. It is a wasteful practice. II. Yes. Modern methods of farming are too expensive.
• Critical reasoning – Should our country extend generous behaviour and goodwill to erring neighbours? Statement: “Should our country extend generous behaviour and goodwill to our erring and nagging neighbours?” Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. Goodwill always pays dividends. II. No. Our generosity will be considered a weakness.
• Critical reasoning – Is the pen mightier than the sword? Statement: “Is pen mightier than a sword?” Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. Writers influence the thinking of people. II. No. With physical force one can conquer all.
• Critical reasoning – Should sex-determination tests during pregnancy be completely banned? Statement: “Should the sex determination test during pregnancy be completely banned?” Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. It leads to indiscriminate female foeticide and long-run social imbalance. II. No. People have a right to know about their unborn child.
• Critical reasoning – Should persons convicted of criminal offences in the past be allowed to contest elections? Statement: “Should persons convicted of criminal offences in the past be allowed to contest elections in India?” Arguments to evaluate: I. No. Such persons cannot serve the cause of the people and the country. II. Yes. It is a democracy—let people decide whom to vote for.
• Critical reasoning — Should officers who accept bribes be punished? Statement: Should officers accepting bribe be punished? Arguments: I. No. Certain circumstances may have compelled them to take bribe. II. Yes. They should do the job they are entrusted with, honestly.
• Public policy reasoning — Should India impose a complete ban on all chemical pesticides? Statement: Should there be a complete ban on use of all types of chemical pesticides in India? Arguments: I. No. The pests will destroy all the crops and the farmers will have nothing to harvest. II. Yes. The chemical pesticides used in agriculture pollute underground water and this has become a serious health hazard.
• Environment vs industry — Should cutting of trees be banned altogether? Statement: Should cutting of trees be banned altogether? Arguments: I. Yes. It is very much necessary to restore ecological balance. II. No. A total ban would harm timber-based industries.
• Constitutional rights — Should migration between Indian states be restricted? Statement: Should there be a restriction on migration of people from one state to another in India? Arguments: I. No. Any Indian citizen has a basic right to live anywhere in the country and cannot be stopped. II. Yes. This is the way to bring equitable distribution of resources across states.
• Refugee policy — Should all unauthorized refugees be forced to return? Statement: Should all refugees who make unauthorized entry into a country be forced to go back to their homeland? Arguments: I. Yes. They build colonies and occupy a lot of land. II. No. They leave due to hunger or terror and, on human grounds, should not be forced to return.
• Energy security — Should India build a large strategic oil reserve? Statement: Should India create a huge oil reserve like some Western countries to face future difficulties? Arguments: I. No. It would block huge foreign exchange and keep money idle. II. Yes. It would help India withstand shocks of sudden price spikes due to unforeseen circumstances.
• Judicial administration — Should each Indian state have more than one High Court? Statement: Should there be more than one High Court in each state in India? Arguments: I. No. It will waste taxpayers’ money. II. Yes. It will help reduce the backlog of cases pending for a long time.
• Separation of powers — Should judiciary be independent of the executive? Statement: Should judiciary be independent of the executive? Arguments: I. Yes. This would help curb unlawful activities of the executive. II. No. The executive would not be able to take bold measures.
• Health systems — Should all practising doctors be under Government control with salaries and free treatment? Statement: Should all practising doctors be brought under Government control so they get salary from the Government and treat patients free of cost? Arguments: I. No. Such a step would be undemocratic. II. Yes. Despite challenges, it would minimize, if not eradicate, unethical medical practices.
• Campus life — Should students take part in politics? Statement: Should students take part in politics? Arguments: I. Yes. It inculcates leadership qualities. II. No. Students should focus on study and career building.
• Critical reasoning – Should opinion polls that predict election outcomes be banned in India? Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. Such polls may influence voters' minds and thereby affect the outcome. II. No. These polls are conducted all over the world.
• Critical reasoning – Should political parties be banned? Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. Politicians need to be taught a lesson. II. No. Banning parties would end democracy.
• Critical reasoning – Should government offices offer jobs only to wards of government employees? Arguments to evaluate: I. No. It would deny opportunities to deserving individuals and harm the government in the long run. II. No. It violates equality; government owes responsibility to all citizens.
• Critical reasoning – Should vehicles older than 15 years be rejected (barred) in Indian metros? Arguments to evaluate: I. Yes. This would significantly reduce urban pollution levels. II. No. Owners would struggle to relocate and may not find suitable jobs elsewhere.