Question 1

Statement: Should MNCs be allowed to start 100% owned subsidiaries in India? Arguments: I. Yes, our neighbours have permitted. II. No, India 's entrepreneurial system needs protection.

Accepted Answer

I is an absurd argument. It is not necessary that what fits others will fit us. II is a strong argument. India has to balance the competitive environment with some protection to domestic entrepreneurs. Even developed countries change their laws to protect their entrepreneurs.

Question 2

Statement : Should students be banned from carrying mobile phones in college campuses? Arguments: I. No, mobile phone has become essential for an individual and one needs to keep to all day. II. Yes, mobile phones district students from studies.

Accepted Answer

Argument I is weak because it says virtually nothing. II is strong because distraction from studies is not desirable.

Question 3

Statement: Should Parliamentary and Assembly elections in India be clubbed together? Arguments: I. Yes, it will bring down the costs of conducting the elections. II. No, our country consists of a large number of illiterate voters who lack sufficient…

Accepted Answer

Argument I is strong because cost-cutting is desirable, II is weak because illiteracy and lack of ability will be as much an impediment in a combined election as in separate elections.

Question 4

Statement: Should films based on ghosts be banned? Arguments: I. No, film-making is an absolute art. II. Yes, it helps increase superstition.

Accepted Answer

Argument I is weak because it is vague. II is strong because superstition is not desirable.

Question 5

Statement : Railways should introduce conductors (like those in the buses ) for selling tickets on running trains. Arguments: I. Yes, that would reduce the number of ticketless passengers significantly. II. No, that would unnecessarily complicate th…

Accepted Answer

Sometimes people in hurry prefer catching the train although they have no intention to travel without paying . Such people will buy ticket. So I is strong . Revenue earning could be more than that of existing system. Which may supersede the extra costs. So II may not be strong.

Question 6

Statement: Should Company X be allowed to merge with Company Y? Arguments: I. Yes, The merger of Hindustan Lever with Lipton was a success. II. No. A merger affects the morale of the employees of the company which has to play second fiddle in the me…

Accepted Answer

I is a weak argument because such an argument based on a single example may be deceptive. It is possible that the arguer is not taking into account several other mergers which have proved to be failures. II is strong because it presents a genuine disadvantage.

Question 7

Statement: Should communal violence be allowed on television? Arguments: I. Yes, It is only when we see the devil within us that we can exorcise it. II. No, It leads to tensions in actual life.

Accepted Answer

I is strong. Literature and media are often hailed as mirrors of life. If the mirrors doesn't show the dirt on your face, it would be difficult to wipe it clean. II is also strong : there are many such instances.

Question 8

Statement: Should political activity on the campus be restrained? Arguments: I. Yes. Too much of politics vitiates the academic atmosphere. II. No. It will be an impingement on the students 'right to freedom.

Accepted Answer

if only argument I is strong

Question 9

Statement: Should voting be made compulsory for all adults? Arguments: I. Yes. The candidates then elected would be far more representational. II. No. The citizens would thereby lose the right to not choose a representative.

Accepted Answer

I is strong: the more the number of voters, the better the representation. II is also strong if the concept of voting is seen analytically. When you vote, you decide to be with someone. Now, it is not necessary that you must be with someone. Such a compulsion would be going against the democratic principal .

Question 10

Statement: Should subsidy on domestic LPG cylinders be stopped? Arguments: I. Yes. It leads to misuse of LPG by housewives who over- cook their food. II. No. Any subsidy cannot be stopped in a country committed to social welfare.

Accepted Answer

I is not only a weak argument but absurd! Which house-wife would want to spoil her food by over- cooking it? II is also a weak argument: commitment to social welfare dose not imply blind carrying on of subsidies. The necessity of subsidies needs to be revised from time to time on a case-by -case basis.

Question 11

Statement: Should hoardings by roadside be banned? Arguments: I. Yes, they are a disturbance to traffic. II. No. it would result in a loss of revenue.

Accepted Answer

Both are strong argument. A traffic hazard is playing with human lives, which certainly is not desirable. Hence, argument I is strong . II is strong because economic consideration is very important in taking a major decision: consider the tobacco and liquor industries, for example.

Question 12

Statement: Should party X be voted to power? Arguments: I. Yes, it is the only party capable of bringing in stability. II. No. it can 't rule the country properly.

Accepted Answer

Only I is strong. A government needs to be stable to take decisions that would help the country develop. II is weak because it does not specify what it means by ''ruling properly.'' The argument is similar to that raised by desperate political parties.

Question 13

Statement: Should newspaper articles be written in a simple language? Arguments: I. Yes, they are aimed at general reader. II. No. newspaper would lose their respect if this happens.

Accepted Answer

I is strong because it is true that a lay reader would be put off by a profusion of technical terms. II is weak because it is not true. Newspapers would over are using simple language and gaining respect thereby.

Question 14

Statement: Should bomb disposal be give cooperation by the public? Arguments: I. Yes, they are necessary to rescue people's lives. II. No, they are a nuisance to day-to-day life.

Accepted Answer

I is strong because the security of people's lives should be given utmost priority. II is not strong because something is being dismissed summarily as ''nuisance'' without going into its reasons.

Question 15

Statement: Should there be repolling at stations where there has been both -capturing? Arguments: I. Yes, What else do you think? II. No, it is a wastage of resources.

Accepted Answer

I is not strong because it is a stupid argument. In fact, no reason is being given at all. II is not strong because ''wastage of resources'' cannot be arrived at absolutely; it must be seen in a context.

Question 16

Statement: Should the Knowledge of computers be made essential for employment in offices? Arguments: I. Yes, computers are state-of-the -art devices. II. No, works in office are yet to get fully computerised.

Accepted Answer

I is not strong: the reason for the desirability of something is not its ''newness'', but its use. II is strong because it tells us that such a compulsion is not going to benefit us in any big way.

Question 17

Statement: Should the monthly quota for liquor be raised by the Ministry of Defence? Arguments: I. Yes, troops will do anything if they are promised two things-liquor and leave. II. No, consumption of too much alcohol is a medical nightmare and lead…

Accepted Answer

Argument I does not follow because it does not tell any thing about the quantity of liquor. Argument II is strong because it goes into reason and points out the negative effect of excess liquor.

Question 18

Statement: Should the Government bring the prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO)? Arguments: I. No, POTO endangers several constitutionally and internationally accepted human rights standards. II. Yes, terrorism has become a major threat and exis…

Accepted Answer

Both I and II are strong. Infringement of constitutionally and internationally accepted human rights standards can 't be ignored. Hence I is strong . Argument II is also strong because insufficiency of existing laws gives rise to the need to bring new laws.

Question 19

Statement: Should fixation of rents be a matter between landlords and tenants? Arguments : I. Yes, it is the sole right of landlords to fix rents according to his/her investment to carry livelihood and any intervention in this regard would violate A…

Accepted Answer

Argument I is strong because it explains the constitutional rights of a person. II is a weak argument. There is no fear of extortion Because tenants will also be an equal party to rent fixation.

Question 20

Statement: Should there be two time Zones in India? Arguments: I. Yes, Britain, America and some other countries which have developed miraculously have two or more than two time zones. II. No, we have a big country like China where there is only one…

Accepted Answer

Both I and II are weak. We can't correlate the situation in our country with that of other countries without giving the context.

Statement and Argument Questions