Statement and Argument Questions

• Statement–Argument (Preferential Hiring for Wards): Statement: Should government offices offer jobs preferentially to wards of government employees? Arguments: I) No, it denies opportunities to many deserving individuals and harms government quality in the long run. II) No, it violates equality principles; the government owes fairness to all citizens. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Ban Sex Determination Tests): Statement: Should prenatal sex determination be completely banned? Arguments: I) Yes, it enables sex-selective abortion against females and leads to social imbalance. II) No, people have a right to know about their unborn child. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Ban Pre-Election Opinion Polls): Statement: Should opinion polls predicting election outcomes be banned in India? Arguments: I) Yes, such polls may influence voters and affect outcomes. II) No, such polls are conducted worldwide. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Bar >15-Year Vehicles in Metros): Statement: Should vehicles older than 15 years be barred from Indian metros? Arguments: I) Yes, this significantly lowers urban air pollution. II) No, owners will find it very difficult to relocate to other parts of the country. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Candidates with Criminal Convictions): Statement: Should persons convicted of criminal offences in the past be allowed to contest elections in India? Arguments: 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. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Loss-Making PSUs): Statement: Should the government close down loss-making public sector enterprises (PSEs)? Arguments: I) No, employees will lose jobs, security, and earnings—what would they do? II) Yes, in a competitive world the rule is “survival of the fittest.” Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Special Treatment for the Prestigious): Statement: Should prestigious people who commit crimes receive special treatment? Arguments: I) Yes, prestigious people do not commit crimes intentionally. II) No, everybody is equal before the law; special treatment is improper. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Abolish Military?): Statement: Should India have no military force at all? Arguments: I) No, other countries do not believe in non-violence. II) Yes, many Indians believe in non-violence. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Autonomous Professional Courses): Statement: Should professional colleges be encouraged to run their own courses without university affiliation? Arguments: I) Yes, it is the only way to create more opportunities for professional training. II) No, this may dilute quality because not all colleges are equipped to run such courses. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement–Argument (Align with All US Policies?): Statement: Should India support all international policies of the USA? Arguments: I) No, many other powerful countries do not support those policies. II) Yes, it is the only way to gain US development funds. Choose which argument is strong.
• Statement & Argument — Is death a perfect cure for physical suffering? Arguments: I. Yes, when nothing is left in the body, there can be no ailment. II. No, deep physical suffering reaches the spirit and must continue with the same intensity after death.
• Statement & Argument — Are fabulous prices for original paintings of old masters justified? Arguments: I. Yes, originals are scarce, antique works with provenance; collectors value uniqueness, so high prices are justified. II. No, modern painters can paint as well or better for a much lower price.
• Statement & Argument — Do synonyms mean exactly the same? Arguments: I. Yes, a rich language has many words for the same expression. II. No, each so-called synonym carries a distinct nuance and may slightly change meaning in context.
• Statement & Argument — Is murder better than committing suicide? Arguments: I. Yes, removing those responsible for one’s problems is better than sacrificing oneself. II. No, taking another’s life or one’s own can never be right; there is always a third course of action.
• Statement & Argument — Do scientists believe in religion? Arguments: I. Yes, practicing science does not inherently obstruct personal faith. II. No, religion and science do not go together.
• Statement & Argument — Should strikes in the field of education be banned? Arguments: I. Yes, strikes violate professional ethics toward students and society. II. Yes, strikes adversely affect students’ learning and academic calendars.
• Statement & Argument — Should subsidy on higher education be reduced as soon as possible? Arguments: I. No; without subsidy, higher education will go beyond the reach of many. II. Yes; primary education is more important for a largely illiterate population and should be prioritized.
• Statement & Argument — Would dividing states into smaller districts be beneficial? Arguments: I. Yes; smaller districts allow tighter administration and better local grip on issues. II. No; this would unnecessarily increase administrative expenditure.
• Statement & Argument — Should there be an entrance test for admission to graduation in Delhi University? Arguments: I. Yes; an entrance test filters candidates so meritorious students gain admission. II. No; most applicants will not get admission.
• Statement & Argument — Should sex education be part of the school syllabus? Arguments: I. Yes; appropriate education reduces taboo and supports healthy, informed choices. II. No; it would increase wrongdoing because students are not mature.